원인자책임의 원칙에 기초한 국가기후위기 대응정책의 평가와 과제

Today, the climate crisis is increasingly becoming a reality. All over the world, damage caused by abnormal climate and extreme weather such as floods, droughts, typhoons, forest fires, and desertification is continuing. These climate crisis-related phenomena are expected to occur repeatedly and become more severe in the future. Reflecting the current situation, climate litigation against governments are actively underway in countries around the world. In particular, climate litigation has attracted more attention in recent years as a series of court rulings acknowledging the government's active responsibility for responding to the climate crisis. In Korea, climate litigation is currently underway at the Constitutional Court. On April 23, 2024, Asia's first public hearing on climate litigation was held at the Constitutional Court, and on May 21, the second public hearing was held. the claimant argued that the government's passive response to the climate crisis was violating the people's constitutional rights, such as the right to the environment and the right to life. On the other hand, the government argued that the current climate crisis response policy was sufficient, and that excessive greenhouse gas reduction could have a negative impact on national industry and corporate competitiveness. However, looking at ‘the national basic plan for carbon neutrality’ announced in 2023, the greenhouse gas reduction targets for each sector in ‘the national target for reducing greenhouse gases’ were partially revised. In particular, the greenhouse gas reduction rate in the industrial sector has been reduced. It has been argued that this adjustment of reduction targets is contrary to the ‘polluter pays principle’ under the Framework Act on Carbon Neutrality. The polluter pays principle is a basic one that determines who should bear the expenses arising from environmental pollution. It is a principle for determining who should bear the expenses required for the treatment of pollution (i.e., preservation, removal, restoration to original state, etc.) caused by human activities. Article 3(Basic Principles), No. 5 of the Framework Act on Carbon Neutrality stipulates as follows. “It shall endeavor to realize the polluter pays principle by reorganizing the taxation, financial systems, etc. to ensure that the economic costs of environmental pollution or greenhouse gas emission are reasonably reflected in the market price of goods or services.” The basic principles guide legislators' actions, provide guidelines for legal interpretation, and function as legal principles that can be applied bindingly as stipulated in the law. Considering these points, it is meaningful to examine the role of the ‘polluter pays principle’ in Korea's national climate crisis response policy and to find problems and limitations of this principle. In this paper, we examine at the general theory on the content and scope of application of the polluter pays principle. It is also argued that the concept of polluter should be expanded when it comes to responding to the climate crisis. In addition, based on the expanded ‘polluter pays principle’, several issues and tasks of Korea's current climate crisis response policy are being reviewed.