Enforcement of the Serious Accidents Punishment Act Opens Pandora’s Box

The Serious Accidents Punishment Act, set to take effect soon, is controversial. Because it was pushed through as such an unreasonable piece of legislation, its contents are poorly constructed, making major confusion inevitable once it is enforced. It was wrong from the outset that the law was drafted according to the demands of labor unions. As a result, it came to contain biased provisions, ultimately undermining both fairness and practical applicability. Above all, if it is enforced while both those subject to punishment and its scope of application remain unclear, it will open a Pandora’s box, leaving businesses in the dark, unable to predict what kind of confusion will follow.

This law should be focused on reducing accidents, but instead it is concentrated on threatening companies and entrepreneurs. Increasing uncertainty in the business environment is a mistake. As a result, if business management is paralyzed, workers’ lives will inevitably contract and the vitality of the overall economy will decline.

It is embarrassing to even call it a law. Responsibility for making the Serious Accidents Punishment Act this way lies with the political establishment and labor unions. It can be described as a joint product of political demands hostile to business and labor unions that turn a blind eye to workers’ lives.

Labor unions likely expect that this law will allow them to expand their influence. Their intention is to increase their privileges over management rights. The problem, however, is that the harm borne by workers and businesses is greater than the privileges labor unions may gain.

The ambiguity in determining whether there has been a violation of the duty to secure safety and health must be corrected urgently. The current enforcement decree of the Serious Accidents Punishment Act and the Ministry of Employment and Labor’s guidelines do not specify clear standards for the extent to which companies must establish safety measures systems. While the government fails to play its proper role, companies may end up suffering serious damage.

The absence of clear standards of obligation makes it impossible to secure effective safety measures. Confusion on the ground will continue until actual court precedents accumulate. For effective accident prevention, what is needed is not broad, sweeping provisions but rules that specify detailed standards.

There is serious concern that the broad scope of liability for serious accidents will greatly increase corporate responsibility. The Serious Accidents Punishment Act defines the scope of “serious accidents” in an extremely broad and comprehensive manner. Such an abstract and wide-ranging definition leads to the imposition of expansive liability on businesses. There is also the possibility that the scope of criminal punishment will be interpreted broadly. In the end, such a wide scope of liability for serious accidents may create situations in which even unexpected accidents are met with excessive criminal punishment. If the law is operated on the premise of punishing entrepreneurs no matter what, the damage to businesses could be enormous.

The scope of “management responsibility” is unclear. Under the Serious Accidents Punishment Act, the management officer generally refers to the representative director or the director in charge of safety. However, when a separate management officer is appointed, it is unclear whether the representative director is still subject to punishment. In particular, because of the current legal definition of employer, when a serious accident occurs, not only the safety director but also the CEO and major shareholders may be included among those subject to punishment. This coercive method of punishment, in which an accident can immediately lead to the employer’s detention, heightens pressure and anxiety for businesses. Yet the standards remain vague, leaving companies unable to prevent such outcomes. Although the law was created to reduce serious accidents, the result may be nothing more than indiscriminate punishment of businesspeople.

The Serious Accidents Punishment Act, hastily legislated without careful review, should be comprehensively reconsidered. A law whose main content is punishing entrepreneurs rather than reducing accidents is likely to produce serious harmful effects. It can create confusion and inflict damage on businesses, entrepreneurs, and workers alike. The government must work to revise the law in a way that raises the level of the rule of law, taking into account fairness and practical applicability. The provisions should be closely analyzed so that legal improvements can be made to ensure a real reduction in serious accidents.

Sung-no Choi, President of the Center for Free Enterprise (CFE)

---

Original title: 중대재해처벌법 시행, 판도라 상자를 열다

Author: Sung-no Choi

Date: 2022-01-11

Source: https://www.cfe.org/bbs/bbsDetail.php?cid=press&idx=24490