장애인차별금지 및 권리구제 등에 관한 법률에 대한 소고 (Research on the Act on the Prohibition of Discrimination against Disable Persons, Remedy against Infringement of their Rights, Etc.)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 건국대학교 법학연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 일감법학 / 35호 / 367 ~ 393페이지
· 저자명 : 최윤희

초록

본고에서는 장애인차별금지와 권리구제 등에 관한 법률을 검토하고 몇 가지 논점에 대하여 살펴보았다. 수년간의 입법과정에서 이 법은 다양한 관점의 논의를 거치고, 제정 이후몇 차례의 개정을 통해 보다 완성도 높은 법이 되었다. 향후 조금 더 보완을 바란다면 이는대체로 장애의 개념정의, 간접차별과 관련한 편의제공의무, 차별구제와 관련한 몇 가지 개선점 등이다. 먼저 장애의 개념정의에 있어서는 사회적 관점에서의 장애개념 정의가 더 구체화되었으면 한다. 아울러, 미국의 장애인차별금지법 상 규정되어 있는 간주장애개념 규정의 취지를 반영하여 ‘장애가 있다고 추측됨’ 이라는 현행 법 규정을 보다 구체적으로 규정할 필요가 있다. 또한, 편의제공의무의 확대가 차별의 판단과 관련하여 특히 간접차별 판단을 위한 전제조건으로서 꼭 필요하다고 본다. 이를 위해서는 영세사업자등에 대한 국가차원에서의 각종 지원을 비롯한 사회적⋅국가적 차원의 편의제공의무 확대시행이 꼭 필요하다. 차별의 구제와 관련하여서는 입증책임의 전환, 손해배상, 차별원인의 경합 등을 살펴보았다. 입증책임 전환의 경우 비교적 소송현실을 잘 반영한 구체적 타당성이 있는 입법이라고 보지만, 차별원인의 경합에 있어서는 차별에 대한 다른 적법한 원인이 인정된다 하더라도 또 다른 한편으로 위법한 원인인 장애를 원인으로 차별에 이르렀음이 인정된다면그것만으로도 독립적인 차별행위가 성립한다는 취지로 법을 개정할 필요가 있다. 이와 아울러, 차별구제를 위한 법원의 적극적 조치의 활성화와 징벌적 손해배상 등의 도입도 필요하다고 본다.

영어초록

I have reviewed the Korea’s “Act on the Prohibition of Discrimination against Disabled Persons, Remedy against Infringement of their Rights, etc (KDDA).” The KDDA was enacted in April, 2007. After quite bitter arguments over the type and contents of the legislation, it was finally legislated as a separate law regulating only discrimination against disabled persons, not in the form of law handling discrimination for all various reasons. The KDDA, as the result of disputes of several years and review of all the precedent foreign relevant laws, is quite a good and reasonable legislative product from the perspective of its purpose of enactment. The purpose of the KDDA is to prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability in all aspects of life, and to effectively safeguard the rights and interests of individuals discriminated against on the ground of disability, thus enabling them to fully participate in society and establish their right to equality which will ensure their human dignity and sense of value. However, I think there are some points to be further refurbished. According to the KDDA, disability means a physical or mental impairment or loss of function that substantially limits an individual’s personal or social activities for an extended period of time. I would like to suggest that the KDDA should give more weight on the social aspect of the disability notion. Disability, not as a factor carried by disabled persons but as the one perceived by other members of society, should be the key reason of discriminations regulated and forbidden by the KDDA. In the same line, I would like to suggest the definition of disability of the “Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990” of the U.S.A to be reflected in the future revision of the KDDA, in terms of the disability regarded and perceived by the others. I have also reviewed the duty to provide legitimate conveniences to the disabled persons without justifiable grounds. The duty is very important as a precondition to be satisfied, before judging whether there is any indirect discrimination against disabled persons. I would like to suggest that the legitimate exclusion and exemptions of the duty shall be further diminished. To do so, governmental financial support for small businesses is also required. And, as for the shift of burden of proof, I have reviewed the KDDA and found the current statements of it is quite reasonable from the perspective of reality of the litigations process. I have also reviewed the matter of findings of discriminations especially when there are two or more causes exist for one discrimination. The KDDA states that if a disability is deemed to be a primary cause of such discrimination, then such act shall be deemed discrimination under the KDDA. My opinion is that if a disability is one of the substantial causes of a discrimination, then such act should fall under a category of forbidden discrimination. I would like to suggest a revision of the KDDA in this regard. And last, as for the judicial relief for the victims of the illegal discrimination against on the basis of disability, more active roles of the courts are required especially in terms of proactive measures to improve working conditions. In addition to that, punitive damage reimbursement is also preferable to be included in the future revision of the KDDA.

참고자료

· 없음