공사장 생활폐기물에 대한 폐기물처분부담금 부과처분 사안의 법적 문제 ― 서울고등법원 2020누52148 판결을 중심으로 ―

The former 「Framework Act on Resources Circulation」(currently 「the Transition to a Circular Economy Promotion Act」) determines those subject to the imposition and collection of waste disposal charges in accordance with 「the Waste Management Act」. However, 「the Waste Management Act」stipulates the household waste from construction sites can be treated by construction waste disposal companies in accordance with the standards and methods for construction waste, baste on 「the Waste Management Act」and the ordinances of each local government. In this pater, we look at the case in which construction waste collectors and transporters processed domestic waste from construction sites and reported business waste discharge and waste disposal charges, and the disposal agency imposed waste disposal charges on them. The plaintiffs filed a suit to cancel the above imposition on the grounds that they were not emitters of industrial waste and won. Unlike the classification of waste, 「the Waste Management Act」allows some waste treatment according to the nature of the waste, causing confusion about who is responsible for disposal. And even depending on the purpose and systematic interpretation of the former 「Framework Act on Resources Circulation」(currently 「the Transition to a Circular Economy Promotion Act」) there is room to draw a different conclusion from the above ruling. Accordingly, in order to properly dispose of household waste at construction sites, the person responsible for disposing each waste must be clearly defined under 「the Waste Management Act」, and the standards for household waste at construction sites must be adjusted to the extent that local governments can manage and supervise. There is a need to strengthen reporting of household waste emitters at construction sites and management supervision through public sorting stations. Through this organic response, the waste disposal charges system will be able to fulfill its purpose.