원자력 사업자의 민사책임에 관한 비교법적 검토 - 미국, 일본, 한국의 비교분석 - = A Comparative Study on Civil Liability of Nuclear Licensees - Analysis of the United States, Japan and Korea -

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Nuclear liability law has been established in countries as a means of ensuring a speedy and effective remedies for damages arising from nuclear incidents, and easing barriers for civil entities’ joining in nuclear power generation, such as unpredictable liability risks. In light of such purposes, nuclear liability law has established distinguished principles, widely incorporated in national legislations of countries, departing from the traditional tort law that necessitates intentional wrongful act or faulty act as well as causal link with damages. Notably nuclear liability principles include no-fault liability and legal channeling of liability, requirement of limited liability and maximum limit on licensee’s financial security(except Japan, Germany, Switzerland), enforcement of mandatory insurance, as well as government’s compensation.
These principles consist common elements of countries’ nuclear liability legislation, such as the U.S. Price-Anderson Act, Nuclear Liability and Compensation Law of Korea, as well as international conventions applicable to nuclear liability. However, details such as liability limits, financial security requirements, implementation framework differ from country to country. Korea’s liability and financial security limit is relatively low, compared to those of other countries, such as the United States and Japan. From this perspective, previous studies on nuclear liability law has constantly pointed that liability and financial security limit should be increased. Still an increase of liability and financial security limit will lead to a heavier insurance burden for licensee, which may cause increase in generation cost and electricity rate.
This paper, therefore, focuses on how nuclear liability framework of the United States and Japan really work and differ from Korea’s case, then suggests legislative alternatives for Korea’s nuclear liability law, such as a “two-layered financial security” and “retrospective premium”. At the same time, the implication of small modular reactor are analyzed in light of future improvement of nuclear liability law.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 장정욱, "후쿠시마사고와 원자력손해배상제도-배상조치액의 증액을 중심으로-" 27 : 89-121, 2014

2 강형구 ; 전상경, "해외사례 비교를 통한 국내 원자력손해배상제도 개선방안" 21 (21): 23-56, 2022

3 윤부찬, "일본의 후쿠시마 원전사고와 원전손해배상지원기구" 3 : 147-174, 2015

4 김성환, "원전사고의 소해배상에 관한 연구" 14 (14): 41-68, 2014

5 이대성, "원자력손해배상협약 가입을 위한 법적, 정책적 검토" 513-514, 2011

6 윤부찬, "원자력손해배상청구권의 소멸시효에 관한 고찰" 29 (29): 219-265, 2023

7 함철훈, "원자력손해배상제도의 발전과정과 우리나라 원자력손해배상법의 검토과제" 13 (13): 141-195, 2008

8 윤부찬, "원자력손해배상법상 책임집중제도의 문제점에 관한 고찰 - 일본의 논의를 중심으로 -" 28 (28): 75-122, 2022

9 정상기 ; 이윤나, "원자력손해배상 자금의 확충 방안에 관한 연구-후쿠시마 원전사고로부터의 교훈-" 23 (23): 243-276, 2017

10 정용진, "원자력보험의 특성과 운영" 20-25, 2011

11 함철훈, "원자력법제론" 법영사 331-515, 2009

12 함철훈, "원자력 안전과 책임에 대한 비교법적 연구" 2018

13 정상근, "원자력 손해배상책임에 있어서 보험계약 및 보상계약의 담보력 문제와 그 개선방안" 11 (11): 3-22, 2017

14 함철훈, "우리나라 원자력손해배상제도의 분석과 2000년 개정법안의 평가" 11 (11): 291-318, 2000

15 함철훈, "민사불법행위법의 한계와 원자력손해배상제도" 21 : 2002

16 이창환, "미국 원자력손해배상법의 변천과 주요내용" 20 : 501-517, 2003

17 박혜성 ; 김법연 ; 권헌영, "국내외 원자력 손해배상의 정부원조 제도에 대한 고찰" 29 (29): 65-100, 2023

18 寺倉憲一, "東日本大震災後の原子力損害賠償制度をめぐる経緯と課題" 国立国会図書館調査及び立法考査局 2012

19 함철훈, "損害賠償의 範圍- 原子力事故에 의한 所聞損害를 中心으로 -" 13 (13): 259-290, 2007

20 原子力委員会, "原子力損害賠償法第条第項ただし書(免責規定)について"

21 Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "The Price-Anderson Act: 2021 Report to Congress - Public Liability Insurance and Indemnity Requirement for an Evolving Commercial Nuclear Industry" 2021

22 Congressional Research Service, "Price-Anderson Act: Nuclear Power Industry Liability Limits and Compensation to the Public After Radioactive"

23 Raetzke, Christian, "Nuclear Third Party Liability in Germany" 2016 (2016): 2016