생명안전기본법 입법방안 연구

Despite the state’s constitutional obligation to ensure the safety of its citizens, large-scale disasters have continued to recur. This indicates that the existing legal framework, centered on the ‘Framework Act on the Management of Disasters and Safety’, has been insufficient to respond adequately to the complex and structural dangers and risks of modern society. Against this backdrop, this article aims to normatively present the necessity, structure, and principal content of enacting a ‘Framework Act on Human Life’s Safety’. To this end, the study first distinguishes between the concepts of “danger” and “risk”. Drawing on the theories of Ulrich Beck and Niklas Luhmann, it demonstrates that the object of state security has expanded from concrete dangers to risks encompassing structural uncertainty. It further examines the defining characteristics of such risks in contemporary society. Moreover, the article introduces the Risk Governance Framework proposed by the ‘International Risk Governance Council’ and explains the importance of stakeholder participation and transparent communication in a risk governance. It then reviews the current Framework Act on the Management of Disasters and Safety and various individual laws related to disasters and safety management, it confirms the existence of legal gaps, such as limitations in the legal framework, an unclear relationship between disaster management and safety management, and the absence of a risk management concept. In order to address these issues, this article proposes, at the level of legal system design, that the Framework Act on Human Life’s Safety be reconstituted as a comprehensive framework statute encompassing disasters, accidents, and risks as a whole, while the existing Framework Act on the Management of Disasters and Safety be restructured and retitled as a (tentatively named) Framework Act on Disaster Management. Substantively, the proposed Act should articulate the purpose, fundamental concept, and principles of the law, and define the respective responsibilities of the State, citizens, and corporations. It should also explicitly codify and strengthen the rights of citizens and victims. Furthermore, it emphasizes the need to incorporate the concepts of risk governance for preventive measures and transitional justice for post-disaster recovery into the law. Ultimately, the Framework Act on Human Life’s Safety should not be regarded as merely another safety-related statute. Rather, it ought to serve as the starting point of a new normative paradigm in a risk society—one that redefines the State’s constitutional duty to ensure safety and integrates the management of danger and risk with the protection of Human rights.