교통소음과 법적대응

Abstract

This treatise deals with the legal problems of traffic noises. This treatise deals with the remedies against the noise of the traffic, especially a compensation claim, including the injunction claim against traffic noises, and also deals with laying the responsibility on whom, the requisites and the restrictions of the responsibility for a compensation for damage etc. The Seoul Central District Court 2008. 12. 17, 2007Gahap51029 (hereinafter “the 2007Gahap51029 precedent”) decided on the living conditions specifically, and set the new standard for judgment of ‘natural changes attendant on social evolution’. In relation to the ‘preoccupancy’ rule, “the 2007Gahap51029 precedent” is substantially different from the other precedents. I doubt whether we need to accept the new test of ‘natural changes attendant on social evolution’ instead of the existing test of the limit of endurance. Even if “the 2007Gahap51029 precedent” is correct, we should not accept the meaning of “the 2007Gahap51029 precedent” as a reject of the injunction or a compensation claim generally. We should make a judgment case by case prudently. The Korean constitutional law has the regulation on the environmental rights. However, “the 2007Gahap51029 precedent” advance a theory on the premise that we cannot claim for damages only according to the environmental rights in case that concrete regulations relating to the environmental rights do not exist. The one who suffers from the noise of the traffic can claim for damages against the house construction company in case that the company hides the information or provides the incorrect information on the traffic noise etc. The soundproof facilities which absorb the noise of the traffic instead of the transparent soundproof facilities are recommended because of an excellent soundproof effects.