동물 보호와 법적 패러다임의 전환: 형법상 긴급피난 정당성 확대를 중심으로

This research aims to establish legal justification criteria for animal rescue operations through comparative analysis of necessity defense doctrines in Korean and U.S. laws, with particular focus on differences in objective harm assessment and subjective intent determination. U.S. animal protection legislation maintains a policy orientation that emphasizes post-incident response rather than preventive measures by strengthening the "directness of danger" requirement. This approach seeks to secure flexibility in legal mechanisms for animal protection while minimizing social costs caused by excessive regulation. The implications of U.S. animal protection legal frameworks for the Korean Animal Protection Act system can be summarized as follows. First, procedural clarity stands as the most exemplary point demonstrated across U.S. state laws. New York, Florida, and California all clearly specify "authorized agents", "specific situations" warranting intervention, "judicial review procedures" following intervention, and "cost recovery mechanisms". This procedural clarity provides unambiguous guidelines for enforcement officials, legal protection for animal welfare activists, and guarantees of procedural due process for animal owners. Second, U.S. laws actively utilize public-private partnerships by delegating limited public authority to certified private organizations. In particular, New York State's SPCA officer system demonstrates effective collaboration between public authorities and private organizations, serving as an exemplary model directly applicable to Korea. Third, U.S. legislation provides clear legal grounds for charging animal owners for costs incurred in treating and protecting rescued animals. This imposes economic consequences for negligent animal care even after incidents occur, functioning as an essential systemic element for stable operation of animal rescue institutions. This reflects the inseparable combination of rights and obligations inherent in animal ownership. Law represents "standardization of values" closer to philosophy than mathematical calculation. This issue is closely connected to future directions in animal protection legislation and requires continuous research and discussion.