• Journal of Environmental Policy
• /
• v.8 no.4
• /
• pp.125-147
• /
• 2009

The Basic Environmental Policy Act (BEPA) (Law No. 4257 effective 1. August 1990) sets forth the basic policies and administrative framework for environmental preservation, leaving more detailed regulations, and emission controls to separate laws targeting air, water, and solid waste, etc. The BEPA Article 31 adopts an unprecedented strict liability standard for damages as an absolute liability. The BEPA Article 31 provides for liability as follows. If a company is alleged to have caused damage through pollution of the environment, it will be liable for damages unless it can show that the pollution did not cause damages, or that it did not actually cause pollution. If the company did cause pollution, and if the pollution is the cause for the damages in question, the company will be liable irrespective of whether it was negligent or otherwise at fault. If there are two or more companies involved in the pollution, but it is unclear which company caused the damages, all of the companies will be jointly and severally liable for the damages. In this paper, the author attempts to uncover the problems of BEPA Article 31 and then seeks desirable amendments by comparing it to the German Environmental Liability Act. First, it will be necessary to provide definitions of 'companies etc.'. Second, it will be necessary to enumerate the kinds of company facilities. Third, it will be necessary to provide exclusionary clauses on material damages. Fourth, it will be necessary to show 'presumption of cause and effect'. Fifth, it will be necessary to provide a clause on 'right to information'. Sixth, it will be necessary to provide a clause for force majeure. Seventh, it will be necessary to take measures to secure abundant liability for damages which can be caused by the owner of the facility, the potential polluter. Finally, it is appropriate that Korea now legislate an Environmental Liability Act akin to the German Environmental Liability Act.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.35 no.1
• /
• pp.153-180
• /
• 2020

This study is meaningful in finding out what legal and policy issues need to be improved in order to foster the aircraft industry, which is relatively underdeveloped compared to the fact that some heavy industries, such as the automobile industry and shipbuilding industry, have achieved a high level of production and technology globally. Korea's aircraft industry has been growing at a slower pace than other industries, largely due to the country's economic growth and the lack of a market structure to properly use variables such as the level of development in related industries, aircraft technology and demand for aircraft manufacturing. While most industries are privately led by the market structure of the competition system, heavy industries such as the aircraft industry generally grow under the market structure of the incomplete competition system, because only by securing huge initial investment costs, high technology, and sufficient demand, they can maintain minimum economic feasibility. The Korean aircraft industry was focused on developing and mass-producing military aircraft focusing on military demand, but it sought to turn the tide by signing the BASA (Bileral Aviation Safety Agreement) with the U.S. A preliminary feasibility study was conducted in 2010 to develop next-generation medium-sized aircraft, but was cancelled due to differences in position with Canada's Bombardier, which is subject to the concourse, and Korea Aerospace Industries (KAI) is pushing for the production of Bombardier's Q400 license on its own. Compared to the mid-to-large sized civil aircraft that are facing difficulties in development, KAI and KARI are successfully developing technologies to unmanned aerial vehicles and civil helicopters. In addition, the unmanned aerial vehicle sector is not yet suitable for manufacturers that have an exclusive global influence, so we believe that it is necessary to pursue government-led research and development projects with a focus on the areas of commercial helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles in order to foster the aircraft industry in the future. In addition, since military aircraft such as KT-1 and T-50 are currently being exported smoothly, and it cannot be overlooked that the biggest demand for aircraft manufacturing in the Korea is the military, it is necessary to push forward national R&D projects and defense R&D program simultaneously to enable both civilian-military development. However, there are many differences between the two projects in the way they are implemented, the department in charge and the royalty system. Through this study, we learned about the technology ownership and implementation rights of national R&D projects and defense R&D programs, as well as the royalty system. In addition, problems with the system were identified and improvement measures were derived.