농업인 안전재해 예방을 위한 각국의 법령체계 비교와 시사점

As a result of this study, the prevention of agricultural work safety accidents starts from the ‘freedom of the body’ of Article 7 of the Constitution. Since this fundamental right also implies an objective order of value, the state should ensure that all citizens, including self-employed farmers, are protected from the constitutional basic rights protection obligation from the danger of violating “freedom of body safety”. As long as self-owned farmers are discriminated against agricultural workers and ordinary workers from the prevention of agricultural work safety accidents, this is an infringement of the right to equality and the state does not guarantee the constitutional basic right to freedom of physical safety. Thus, the state is obliged to take active legislation to prevent agricultural work safety accidents. From the point of view of comparative research, the implications of farmers, especially self-owned farmers, from foreign countries to prevent safety accidents during farming are as follows. First of all, the ILO Recommendation should not prevent safety accidents in terms of agriculture as one industrial sect, but rather preventive systems in terms of human labor in agriculture. Therefore, the safety of agricultural work disasters means that the same measures should be taken regardless of ordinary workers, agricultural workers, and self-owned farmers. Another ILO Recommendation suggests that self-employed farmer does not have any employers who are responsible for safety and health. Through self-owned farmers themselves, safety disaster prevention system and policy should be established and carried out. As a result of examining the position of other major countries, each country has a different situation regarding the prevention of safety disasters of self-farming. Most countries refer to the application of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, which applies to ordinary workers, mainly for agricultural workers. However, self-employed farmers should enjoy the freedom of physical safety under Article 12 of the Constitution as a general public. As far as discrimination is concerned, there is a risk of equal rights violations. However, making a safety disaster prevention method does not prevent a safety disaster, so various counseling and education programs should be created based on the prevention system. Finally, farmers themselves should come up with ways to participate in the prevention of safety disasters. Above all, as an organization representing their collective interests in relation to the prevention of agricultural worker safety accidents, self-farming should include safety accident prevention in its activities. In addition, as shown in the case of Japan, the law is important in preventing agricultural work safety accidents, but administrative guidance as a non-legal delivery system is very important. In conclusion, comparative studies show that farmers ‘voluntary participation, creation of collective interest structure, and unlawful delivery system are important in preventing farmers’ safety disasters.