새만금 판결로 생각해보는 환경보호와 사법심사

In the Saemangeum judgment(Supreme Court en banc Decision, 2006Du330, Decided March 16, 2006), the Supreme Court of Korea reviewed the approval of large projects in the order of review through environmental impact assessment and substantive judgment on environmental interests. The court stated that even if the content of the environmental impact assessment is somewhat inadequate, unless the inadequacy is so severe that it fails to achieve the legislative purpose of the environmental impact assessment system, it does not render the approval illegal. The court also noted that the inadequacy of water quality predictions does not invalidate the approval. The majority opinion held that the approval should only be canceled if there is a significant change in circumstances that makes maintaining the approval significantly contrary to the public interest, and the burden of proof lies with the party claiming the change in circumstances. On the other hand, the dissenting opinion argued that if the project’s impact is extensive and the anticipated harm is severe, making it unacceptable to tolerate the realization of such harm, the project should be reconsidered, especially if the economic viability or safety is not confirmed in relation to the sacrificed environmental value or the risk of environmental damage. The Saemangeum judgment demonstrates how courts should respond to ensure that environmental interests are reflected in large projects. It also suggests the need for the development of interest-balancing techniques that encompass merit review and the expansion of expert participation.