전자인격체로서 반려로봇(섹스로봇)의 규제 기준 마련을 위한 시론적 고찰

Abstract

According to the needs of human beings, corporations act as independent beings in society as natural persons and are subjects of rights obligations. Although it is an abstract entity that does not exist, no scholar completely denies its legal status in that it is socially beneficial and expects its necessity, function and role. The debate on whether to grant artificial personality to artificial intelligence is no longer a story in fiction, but a concrete and materialized legal affair, as the European Union, in its resolution on intelligent autonomous robots, recognizes, in a limited area, the granting of electronic personality status to electronic humans. It became a necessary task for identification. Therefore, it can be assumed that robots can enjoy their legal status as autonomous subjects and be subjects of rights or obligations to the extent that social consensus is reached. In addition, the legal status of intelligent autonomous robots is more likely than the confusion that can be expected. Necessity must be acknowledged. Requiring a clear legal status for being able to communicate can be clearly seen in the fact that marriage and inheritance with pets are actually being attempted. Regarding this, it can be reasonably concluded that various social confusions and legal disputes may occur. Recognizing the legal status of a part that allows the exchange of emotions and giving the legal robot self-responsibility according to their decision-making will be the first step for the coexistence of humanity and robots. It is believed that granting electronic personality to a companion robot with a consciousness or at least autonomous behavior comparable to the self can lead to a relatively easy social consensus. It is desirable at this stage to interpret that a companion robot or a sex robot, which is recognized as an electronic human being, is an intelligent autonomous robot. Therefore, it is necessary to be able to make autonomous decision making in the external situation by having intelligence as a basic requirement. In addition, there are certain legal and ethical issues that are difficult to accept in human society with regard to companion robots (sex robots). Respond robots, not intelligent autonomous robots, need legal protection even for such unconditional obedience and unconscious beings. Concerns are raised that obeying the human being as a master makes the object of sexuality easy to cause unpersonal actions in dealing with other human beings, and also considers the negative effects that the act of resolving human destructive instincts on the robot will have on our society. You can't help it. Therefore, the companion robot should prohibit excessively non-social, unethical, and anti-social design and production in addition to the existing principles of robot ethics, and in the case of a companion robot that can make intelligent and autonomous decision-making with ethicality, it is legal and institutional. In this regard, a clear legal framework for rights and responsibilities should be established, and for other companion robots, the policy direction should be set to strengthen the management responsibilities of designers, users and the state.