북한의 「비상방역법」과 「전염병예방법」 비교 분석

The purpose of this study is to compare and trace North Korea’s “Emergency Quarantine Act” and “Infectious Disease Prevention Act.” The content specified in both laws by North Korea was analyzed in terms of form and content at the macro-structural level. The similarities and differences were compared at the micro-behavioral level. The method of this study was to analyze the main articles of both laws. As a result of the analysis, in the case of continuity, first, the legislative background and environment of both laws are relevant. It means North Korea’s ‘maintaining behavior’ of institutionally responding to health and medical risks. Second, in the case of the target, scope, and risk of both laws, it showed a unique ‘constancy of awareness’ regarding infectious diseases. This is due to the inherent risk of infectious diseases. Third, in the case of the strategies, actions, and behaviors that appear in the health and medical practice field of both laws, they cannot help but be almost the same as before. This is due to unique medical practices such as detection of infectious disease risks, outbreak and treatment, control, and management. In terms of changes, first, preparations and responses to infectious diseases have been greatly strengthened. Second, regardless of whether they are implemented, there are measures to support the stability of life for North Korean residents during the quarantine period. Third, for emergency quarantine, separate quarantine measures are guaranteed for actual treatment and quarantine along with specific behavioral rules. All of these changes are proven through the “Emergency Quarantine Act.” Starting with COVID-19, North Korea has experienced simultaneous institutional continuity and change in infectious diseases and emergency quarantine.