중대재해처벌법의 헌법적 쟁점에 관한 시론-죄형법정주의 위반론을 중심으로-

January 27 of 2021 "Act on the Punishment, etc. of Critical Accidents (hereinafter referred to as the Act on Punishment of Serious Accidents)"have been implemented. With the introduction of this law, the state's intervention strategy for overall industrial accidents has changed, managers' safety management responsibilities have been clearly set than in the past, and companies' perceptions of industrial accidents have changed. However, the Serious Accident Punishment Act, a law and system with a penal nature, brought about a net function and at the same time caused an adverse effect (side effect). These side effects naturally lead to constitutional issues and have expanded the scope of discussion. This paper was written to examine the constitutional legitimacy (systematic suitability) of the Serious Disaster Punishment Act at a time when the progress of the Serious Disaster Punishment Act is drawing attention to whether it will be put on the cutting board of constitutional trials in the future. As a result, it was concluded that the first issue of the principle of clarity, the definition, is difficult to say that it is contrary to the constitutional principle, but efforts to fill the interpretive gap are needed. Second, the provisions on the obligation to take management measures contained contents that contradicted the principle of clarity and the principle of prohibition of comprehensive delegation. Finally, the "violation of the principle of responsibility for the scope of application" and the "violation of the principle of proportionality to punishment" reviewed are also considered to be difficult to obtain constitutional legitimacy smoothly. Agreeing with the purpose and purpose of this Act, however, it is necessary to observe the Constitutional Court's decision in the future, but it is hoped that the priority will be to faithfully establish an industrial accident prevention infrastructure and actively discuss the operation of the Serious Accident Punishment Act.