건설공사 사전안전성 평가서 적정성 심사제도 개선 방안에 관한 연구 = A Study on the Improvement of the Appropriateness Review System about Preliminary Safety Evaluation Report in the Construction Works

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The industry that causes the most accident deaths among domestic industries is the construction industry, with an average of 392 accident deaths per year over the past five years(2020-2024).
As part of the measures to prevent industrial accidents in the construction industry, the government stipulates that risk factors should be analyzed before construction work begins and a preliminary safety evaluation report reflecting countermeasures is prepared.
In addition, the preliminary safety evaluation form stipulates that to prevent poor evaluation report, it must be confirmed through an appropriateness review by qualified experts or specialized institutions.
On the other hand, domestic prior studies related to the preliminary safety evaluation mainly focus on writing and suggest a direction to strengthen the efficiency of the system, but studies on appropriateness reviews, which is a follow-up task after writing the preliminary safety evaluation, are insufficient.
The purpose of this study is to examine whether the appropriateness review system is operating in accordance with the purpose of introducing the system and to suggest ways to improve the system, such as amendments.
It is important to verify the appropriateness of the preliminary safety evaluation through fair and objective examination and to increase the degree of completion by asking the author to supplement it if any deficiencies are identified.
However, as a result of examining the operation of the preliminary safety evaluation system, focusing on the representative safety laws in Korea, Occupational Safety And Health Act and Construction Technology Promotion Act, an institutional vulnerability that could lead to a so-called "self-review" in which the person who wrote the preliminary safety evaluation report and the person who reviews the appropriateness are the same.
In the case of the safety management plan and the safety and health ledger, preparation agency through specialized agencies was common on behalf of the author, but it was confirmed that the person placing an order for construction works requested a specialized agency to review the appropriateness of the preparation without knowing the situation.
As a result, the agency reviewed the safety management plan and the safety and health ledger prepared by the agency.
Based on the results of the study, three main causes of self-review were judged, and improvement measures for each cause were presented in terms of system, orderer, and reviewer, respectively.
First, in consideration of the generalization of preliminary safety evaluation agencies, related laws and regulations were proposed to prevent institutions or experts who participated in preliminary safety evaluation preparations and advice.
Second, in consideration of the fact that the person placing an order for construction works is causing self-review without realizing it, a measure was proposed to establish a procedure for confirming the status of the preparation of the preliminary safety evaluation report to the designer or construction company before requesting an appropriateness review.
Third, referring to Act On The Prevention Of Conflict Of Interest Related To Duties Of Public Servants, a measure was proposed to prove that the institution or expert requested to review the preliminary safety evaluation report can perform their work fairly.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론 1
• 1. 연구 배경 및 목적 1
• 2. 연구 범위 및 방법 5
• Ⅱ. 건설공사 사전안전성 평가제도 이론적 고찰 7
• 1. 건설기술 진흥법에 따른 사전안전성 평가제도 이론적 고찰 7
• 1.1. 건설기술 진흥법 개요 7
• 1.2. 안전관리계획서 개요 및 업무 절차 7
• 1.3. 설계안전검토보고서 개요 및 업무 절차 9
• 2. 산업안전보건법에 따른 사전안전성 평가제도 이론적 고찰 11
• 2.1. 산업안전보건법 개요 11
• 2.2. 유해위험방지계획서 개요 및 업무 절차 12
• 2.3. 안전보건대장 개요 및 업무 절차 15
• Ⅲ. 사전안전성 평가서 작성 및 적정성 심사제도 운영 실태 20
• 1. 연구 대상 및 방법 20
• 1.1. 연구 대상 선정 결과 및 사유 20
• 1.2. 연구 방법 21
• 2. 연구 결과 21
• 2.1. 작성 실태 21
• 2.2. 적정성 심사 실태 및 문제점 23
• 2.3. 원인 분석 24
• Ⅳ. 사전안전성 평가서 적정성 심사제도 개선방안 27
• 1. 유사 제도 사례 분석 27
• 2. 공직자의 이해충돌 방지법 규정 분석 28
• 3. 개선방안 29
• 3.1. 제도적 측면 29
• 3.2. 발주자 측면 32
• 3.3. 심사자 측면 33
• Ⅴ. 결론 35
• 참고문헌 37