Invest KOREA

In this case, “the number of regular employees” under Article 38 (1) 28 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act means the number of regular employees who are newly employed by the factory or research facility after concluding the sale contract.

Where falling under the causes prescribed by the subparagraphs of Article 38 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act as delegated by the proviso of Article 29 (1) of the Act, it is exceptionally permitted to sell general property through a private contract. The purpose of this is to give permission for private contract when there is an inevitable reason or when the nature of a general property such as its location, form, or use makes it difficult to sell the property through an open competitive bid. Also, Article 38 (1) 28 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act prescribes a cause for sale of general property through a private contract as follows: where property is sold for the purpose of attracting a factory or research facility of a company which employs 30 or more regular employees residing in the relevant area or intends to procure 30% or more of raw materials from the area, which is a facility that meets the standards prescribed by ordinance of the local government, in order to promote the local economy.

However, when looking at the text of Article 38 (1) 28 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act, the dictionary meaning of “attract” is to “bring businesses, etc. to an area”, and it is stated that a private contract may be signed if general property is sold to attract a factory or research facility of a company that intends to “procure” 30% or more of raw materials from the relevant area, which clearly indicates that the portion of raw materials to be procured in the area is an objective to be reached by sale through a private contract. In this regard, the requirements on the number of regular workers should be interpreted as an assessment criteria to determine how much the objective of promoting the local economy by attracting a factory or research facility to the area has been accomplished.

Also, Article 38 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act was established as delegated by Article 29 (1) of the Act, which serves as the legal basis for the loan and sale of general property, and similar to Article 38 (1) 28 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act, Article 29 (1) 19 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act which regulates the matters on the loan of general property as delegated by the same paragraph prescribes that general property can be loaned through a private contract if the loan is for the “attraction” of a facility that employs 10 or more regular employees residing in the relevant area and satisfies one of the items under the same subparagraph to promote the local economy, and also stipulates that the matters such as the detailed criteria for selection, selection procedure and method shall be determined and publicly announced by the Minister of the Interior and Safety. And considering the fact that Article 14 (2) of the Guidelines on Operation of Local Governments’ Public Property, which is a public notice by the Minister of the Interior and Safety legislated as delegated by the abovementioned Article of the Enforcement Decree of the Act, stipulates that “the number of regular employees residing in the relevant area” is an uation item to assess the relevant facility’s contribution to job creation, it will be valid to interpret that “the number of regular employees” under Article 38 (1) 28 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act is a standard to assess whether employment has increased after the sale of general property.

Therefore, in this case, “the number of regular employees” under Article 38 (1) 28 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act means the number of regular employees newly employed by a factory or research facility after a sales contract has been concluded.

In this case, the number of self-measurements on air pollutants falling under specified hazardous air pollutants is subject to note 9 of Attached Table 11 of the Enforcement Rules of the Act.

Pursuant to Article 39 (1) of the Act, Attached Table 11 of the Enforcement Rules of the same Act prescribes the subject, items and method of self-measurement of pollutants emitted when a business operates emission facilities. According to the Article, it is stipulated that among businesses that automatically transfer the measurement results to the smokestack remote surveillance system control center, where class 3 vents without an automatic smokestack measurement device is measured only for the rear end of the prevention facility (table 2 (a) of the same Attached Table), the number of self-measurements shall be at least once every two months and at least once every quarter where the front and rear of the prevention facility are both measured (table 2 (b) of the same Attached Table).

However, according to note 1 of Attached Table 11 of the Enforcement Rules of Act, where specified hazardous air pollutants emitted are no less than the standards under Attached Table 8-2 of the said Enforcement Rule, self-measurement of the relevant pollutant should be conducted at least twice a month notwithstanding the aforementioned Attached Table (table 1 and tables 2 (a) and 2 (b)). Also, according to note 9 of the Attached Table, self-measurement should be conducted at least once a quarter where air pollutants were continuously within 30% of the permissible emission standards according to pollutant testing results for the previous year and measurements are taken for only the rear of the prevention facilities, and at least once every half-year where the front and rear of the prevention facilities are measured together. In this regard, the issue in this matter is whether the number of self-measurements on air pollutants falling under specified hazardous air pollutants is subject to note 1 of Attached Table 11 of the Enforcement Rules of the Act or note 9 of the same Attached Table.

In the Clean Air Conservation Act, “specified hazardous air pollutants” are included in “air pollutants”, and if the clauses defining matters related to air pollutants exclude or do not separately define specified hazardous air pollutants, matters related to air pollutants can be applied to specified hazardous air pollutants as well. Therefore, it can be said that note 9 of Attached Table 11 of the Enforcement Rules of the Act also applies to specified hazardous air pollutants.

Also, tables 1 and 2 of Attached Table 11 of the Enforcement Rules of the Clean Air Conservation Act classify places of business based on whether they automatically transmit measuring results to the smokestack remote surveillance system control center, and table 2 of the same Attached Table applies eased standards on the number of measurements compared to table 1 of the same Attached Table, and in notes 8 and 9 of the same Attached Table, the standards on self-measurement of tables 1 and 2 of the same Attached Table are additionally eased, with note 9 applying more eased standards compared to note 8. In this regard, in this case, if note 1 of the said Attached Table applies instead of note 9 of the Table, it will mean that the number of self-measurements of class 3 vents under note 2 of the Table outnumbers the self-measurements of class 3 vents under note 1 of the Attached Table by at least twice per month. Therefore, in this regard, applying note 1 of the Attached Table shall not be in compliance with the system of self-measurements prescribed under Attached Table 11 of the Enforcement Rules of the Act.

Consequently, in this case, note 9 of Attached Table 11 of the Enforcement Rules of the Act applies to the number of self-measurements for air pollutants falling under specified hazardous air pollutants.

The period of childcare leave that can be additionally used pursuant to the proviso of Article 19 (2) of the Act is not included in the period of reduction of working hours for the period of childcare leave that can be additionally used pursuant to the proviso of Article 19-2 (4) of the same Act.

In the proviso of Article 19-2 (4) of the Act which prescribes the period of reduction of working hours during the childcare period, it is regulated that where an employee who is eligible to apply for childcare leave has not fully used such leave for the period of childcare leave pursuant to the main sentence of Article 19 (2), two times the remaining period shall be added to the period of reduction of working hours. In this regard, it is clear that the period of childcare leave that can be added to the period of reduction of working hours during the childcare period applies only to the childcare leave period under the main sentence of Article 19 (2) of the same Act, and not to the childcare leave period that can be additionally used under the proviso of the same paragraph.

Also, the proviso of Article 19 (2) of the Act was newly inserted when the Act was partially amended to Act no. 20521 on Oct. 22, 2024 so that the period of childcare leave can be extended for both parents when they each use childcare leave in order to promote equal childcare participation and strengthen support for work-family balance for workers. With the aforementioned amendment, the proviso of Article 19-2 (4) of the same Act was amended as well, changing the period of childcare leave that can be added to the period of reduction of working hours during the childcare period from “the period of childcare leave pursuant to Article 19 (2) that has not been used” to “the period of childcare leave that has not been used among the period of childcare leave pursuant to the main sentence of Article 19 (2)”. As such, the proviso of Article 19 (2) of the Act prescribing the period of childcare leave was newly inserted to expand the period of childcare leave that workers can use, while the period of childcare leave that can be added to the period of reduction of working hours during the period of childcare remained unchanged, restricted to the period of childcare leave pursuant to the main sentence of Article 19 (2) of the Act. Based on such, it shall be appropriate to interpret that the period of childcare leave that can be added to the period of reduction of working hours during the period of childcare pursuant to the proviso of Article 19-2 (4) of the Act shall be restricted to the period of childcare leave according to the main sentence of Article 19 (2) of the same Act, and the additional period of childcare leave that can be used in accordance with the proviso of the same paragraph shall not be included in the period of childcare leave that can be added to the period of reduction of work hours during the childcare leave period.

In conclusion, the period of childcare leave that can be additionally used under the proviso of Article19 (2) of the Act is not included in the period of reduction of working hours during the childcare period that can be added under the proviso of Article 19-2 (4) of the same Act.

The owner of the relevant electrical installations cannot have an agent perform electrical safety management duties on his/her behalf pursuant to Article 22 (3) of the Electrical Safety Management Act and Article 26 (1) of the Enforcement Rules of the same Act.

Under Article 22 (1) of the Electrical Safety Management Act, it is prescribed that an electric utility business entity or an owner of an electric installation for private use should, in principle, appoint an electric safety manager for electric equipment. However, paragraph (3) of the same Article exceptionally stipulates that an owner or occupant of electric installations of or below the scale determined by Ministerial Decree of Trade, Industry and Energy may have the Korea Electrical Safety Corporation (subparagraph 1), an agent that is a business entity (subparagraph 2), or an agent that is an individual (subparagraph 3) perform the safety management duties on behalf of him or her, as an agent. Also, Article 26 of the Enforcement Rules of the Act classifies the scale of electric installations permitted according to the type of the electrical safety management agent. For example, subparagraph 1 of the same Article prescribes that the Korean Electrical Safety Corporation and agent businesses can perform electrical safety management duties for electric installations such as electric receiving equipment with less than 1,000 kw capacity (item a), emergency spare generator with less than 500 kw capacity (item d). As such, the items under subparagraph 1 of Article 26 of the Enforcement Rules of the Electrical Safety Management Act prescribe the scale of electric installations for which agent businesses can perform safety management duties classified by the type of electric installations such as electric receiving equipment, and solar power generation equipment among new and renewable energy generation equipment, which means that each electric installation should satisfy the scale standards by type of electric installation stipulated in each item of subparagraph 1 of Article 26 of the Enforcement Rules in order for an agent to perform electrical safety management duties for different types of electric installations.

However, in the case of the relevant electric installations, electric receiving equipment (800 kw) meet the scale standard “under 1,000 kw” under subparagraph 1 (a) of Article 26 of the Enforcement Rules of the Electrical Safety Management Act, but emergency spare generators (610 kw) do not meet the scale standard of “below 500 kw” under item (d) of the same subparagraph, so the relevant electric installations include electric installations for which an agent cannot perform electrical safety management duties. In this regard, a single agent cannot perform the said duties for all of the relevant electric installations on behalf of the owner.

Also, the purpose of the Electrical Safety Management Act is to protect the life and property of the people and ensure public safety by prescribing matters necessary for prevention of electrical disasters and safety management of electric installations (Article 1). In addition, under Article 22 of the Act, an electric utility business entity or an owner or occupant of electric installations for private use shall appoint an electrical safety supervisor (Article 1), while it is prescribed that electric safety management duties for electric installations for private use that is below a certain scale can be performed by an agent instead of an appointed electrical safety supervisor because such electric installations have a relatively low risk of electric installations-related accidents. In this regard, where part of several electrical installations satisfies the standards under the items of subparagraph 1 of Article 26 of the Enforcement Rules of the Act and part of the installations exceeds the standards, it does not align with the legislative purpose of the Act and the purpose of the relevant regulation to interpret that electric safety management duties for all of the electric installations can be performed by an agent pursuant to Article 22 (3) of the Act and subparagraph 1 of Article 26 of the Enforcement Rules of the Act.

In this regard, the owner of the relevant electric installments cannot have an agent business entity perform safety management duties for all of the relevant electric installations under Article 22 (3) of the Act and subparagraph 1 of Article 26 of the Enforcement Rules of the Act.

Substances obtained by physical extraction or purification of substances in their natural state are not excluded from “chemical substances” pursuant to subparagraph 1 of Article 3 of the Act.

Under subparagraph 1 of Article 3 of the Consumer Chemical Products and Biocides Safety Control Act, the term "chemical substance" means any elements, its compounds and substances obtained by an artificial chemical reaction thereto, and substances obtained by a chemical transformation, extraction or purification of substances in their natural state, so the text is unclear whether “chemical” modifies “extraction or purification” as well.

The legislative history of the regulation on the definition of “chemical substance” is as follows: 1) before wholly amended into Act no. 11862 on June 4, 2013, subparagraph 1 of Article 2 of the Hazardous Chemical Substances Control Act regulated that “chemical substance” means any element, its compounds and substances obtained by an artificial chemical reaction thereto, and substances obtained by extraction or purification of substances in their natural state; 2) The Act on Registration and uation of Chemical Substances was legislated as Act no. 11789 on May 22, 2013 and subsequently the Chemical Substances Control Act was wholly amended to Act no. 11862 on June 4, 2013. With such changes, the regulation on the definition of “chemical substance” in the two laws came to include the phrase “chemical transformation”; 3) With the regulation on the definition of “chemical substance” under subparagraph 1 of Article 2 of the Act on Registration and uation of Chemical Substances as reference, the same regulation on the definition of “chemical substance” was newly inserted in subparagraph 1 of Article 3 of the Consumer Chemical Products and Biocides Safety Control Act legislated as Act no. 15511 on March 20, 2018.

Based on such legislative history of the regulation on the definition of “chemical substances” the term “chemical” was added along with “transformation”, while “extraction” and “purification” were already being used in the regulations on the definition of chemical substance. In this regard, it should be regarded that “chemically” modifies only “transformation”, not “extraction” and “purification”.

In addition, the phrase “chemical transformation” was added to the regulation on the definition of “chemical substance” when the legal grounds for managing products containing chemical substances were established by legislating the Act on Registration and uation of Chemical Substances as Act no. 11789 on May 22, 2013, and the Consumer Chemical Products and Biocides Safety Control Act was legislated as Act no. 15511 on March 20, 2019 for the systematic safety management of products containing chemical substances such as consumer chemical products and biocides. In this regard, if the phrase “chemical transformation, extraction or purification of substances” is interpreted into the opposite meaning of “physical extraction or purification” of substances in their natural state and thereby concluding that substances obtained by the aforementioned method is excluded from the scope of “chemical substance”, such interpretation does not conform to the legislative purpose of the Act on Registration and uation of Chemical Substances and the Consumer Chemical Products and Biocides Safety Control Act, which have been amended over the years to strengthen the regulations on products containing “chemical substance”.

Also, under subparagraph 1 of Article 3 of the Consumer Chemical Products and Biocides Safety Control Act, “chemical substance” means: 1) any element, its compounds and substances obtained in an artificial chemical reaction thereto; and 2) substances obtained by chemical transformation, extraction or purification of substances in their natural state. In this regard, even if a substance is not a “substance obtained by chemical transformation, extraction or purification of substances in their natural state”, but falls under “any element, its compounds and substances obtained in an artificial chemical reaction thereto”, it shall still be considered “chemical substance” under the same subparagraph. Therefore, it cannot be said that a substance is excluded from “chemical substance” under subparagraph 1 of Article 3 of the same Act just because it is a substance obtained by physical extraction or purification of substances in their natural state.

In conclusion, a substance obtained by physical extraction or purification of substances in their natural state is not excluded from the scope of “chemical substance” pursuant to subparagraph 1 of Article 3 of the Consumer Chemical Products and Biocides Safety Control Act.

No. Food wastes under subparagraph 1 (d) of Article 2 of the Biogas Act do not include intermediately processed food wastes under subparagraph 2 of attached Table 4 of the Enforcement Rules of the Wastes Control Act.

Under subparagraph 1 (d) of Article 2 of the Biogas Act, “food wastes among wastes under subparagraph 1 of Article 2 of the Wastes Control Act” are prescribed as an organic waste resource. However, under subparagraph 1 of Article 2, it is stated that the term "wastes" means such materials as garbage, burnt refuse, sludge, waste oil, waste acid, waste alkali, and carcasses of animals, which have become no longer useful for human life or business activities, and Article 2-2 of the same Act regulates that detailed classification of wastes concerning the kinds and recycling types of wastes shall be prescribed by Ministerial Decree of Environment in consideration of the generation source, constituents, harmfulness, etc. of wastes, and subparagraph 2 of attached Table 3 of the Enforcement Rules of the same Act legislated as delegated by the Act stipulates “food wastes and treated food wastes (51-38)” as a subordinate category of ordinary industrial wastes, and the sub-subcategories are prescribed as food wastes (51-38-01), intermediately-processed food wastes (51-38-02), remnants from treated food wastes (51-28-03) and other remnants from treated food wastes (51-38-99). In this regard, it should be considered that according to the Wastes Control Act, food wastes and intermediately-processed food wastes are separate wastes, each with different classification numbers.

Also, in accordance with Article 14-3 (1) of the Wastes Control Act, a Special-Governing City Mayor, a Special Self-Governing Province Governor, or the head of a Si/Gun/Gu shall formulate and implement a plan to restrain the generation of food wastes, and shall annually uate the outcomes of implementation thereof, and Article 15-2 of the same Act stipulates the obligations to comply with rules prescribed by ordinance for restraining the generation of food wastes and properly treating such wastes. However, considering that Article 13 (1) of the same Act refers to “intermediately processed wastes” as wastes that are made readily recyclable in view of the principles of recycling wastes and matters to be observed under Article 13-2, intermediately-processed food wastes do not fall under food wastes which are subject to the formulation and implementation of a plan to restrain the generation of food wastes and the application of obligations under Article 15-2 of the Act, but should be considered wastes that are intermediately processed for the proper final treatment (recycling) according to a plan to restrain food waste generation. In other words, it will be appropriate to interpret that intermediately-processed food wastes should be classified separately from food wastes according to the Wastes Control Act.

Also, if we look at the legislative history of the Enforcement Rules of the Wastes Control Act, in subparagraph 2 of attached Table 4 of the Enforcement Rules of the Wastes Control Act partially amended to Ordinance of the Ministry of Environment no. 595 on Mar. 3, 2015, 51-38-00 is newly inserted and “food wastes and treated food wastes” is added as a new classification number, and “food wastes (58-38-01)”, “intermediate wastes of food wastes (51-38-02), and “remnants from treated food wastes (51-28-03) and “other remnants from treated food wastes (51-38-04)” are prescribed as subordinate categories. This is to clearly classify wastes and assign new classification numbers in order to appropriately manage remnants generated in the process of recycling food wastes and remnants from treated food wastes, and “intermediate wastes of food wastes” was renamed to the currently used “intermediately-processed food wastes” in 51-38-02 of subparagraph 2 of attached Table 4 of the Enforcement Rules of the Wastes Control Act partially amended to Ordinance of the Ministry of Environment no. 664. In this regard, “food wastes” and “intermediately-processed food wastes” under the Wastes Control Act should be interpreted as separate concepts that should be classified separately for the appropriate management of wastes.

In addition, the purpose of the Biogas Act is to promote the environment-friendly utilization of organic waste resources (Article 1), and Article 5 (1) of the Act obligates that public producers and private producers (hereafter “obligated producers of biogas”) shall establish and manage targets for biogas production every year. Also, Article 9 (1) of the Act prescribes that an obligated producer of biogas shall report the organic waste resources discharge volume, the organic waste resources treatment volume, and the biogas production volume to the Minister of Environment. As such, considering that organic waste resources discharge volume and biogas production volume are strictly managed, it shall be more appropriate to interpret that organic waste resources under subparagraph 1 of Article 2 of the Act do not include intermediately-processed food wastes and only includes food wastes (raw materials) in a pre-processed state, given that it better conforms to the legislative purpose of the Act, which prescribes obligated producers of biogas and imposes various responsibilities to promote the utilization of organic waste resources.

Therefore, food wastes pursuant to subparagraph 1 (d) of Article 2 of the Biogas Act do not include intermediately-processed food wastes under 51-38-02 of subparagraph 2 of attached Table 4 of the Enforcement Rules of the Wastes Control Act.

Yes. Acid treatment facilities among semiconductor manufacturing facilities fall under acid treatment facilities that are emission facilities to which an automatic smokestack measuring device should be attached pursuant to Article 17 (5) and subparagraph 1 ( r) 4) of the Enforcement Decree of the Clean Air Conservation Act.

In subparagraph 1 of attached Table 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Clean Air Conservation Act, item (r) of the same subparagraph prescribes manufacturing facilities such as facilities for assembled metal products, and item (r) 6) classifies deposition facilities and etching facilities among semiconductor and other electronic parts manufacturing facilities. In this regard, it should be considered that manufacturing facilities such as facilities for assembled metal products include semiconductors and other electronic parts manufacturing facilities. However, it is stipulated that deposition facilities and etching facilities under item (r) 6) fall under emission facilities subject to attachment of automatic smokestack measuring device, but acid treatment facilities under item (r) 4) are not limited to semiconductors and other electronic parts manufacturing facilities, so it should be regarded that acid treatment facilities among manufacturing facilities of all assembled metal products including semiconductor and other electronic parts manufacturing facilities. Therefore, acid treatment facilities among semiconductor manufacturing facilities should also be considered acid treatment facilities subject to attachment of automatic smokestack measuring device in accordance with subparagraph 1 (r) of attached Table 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Clean Air Conservation Act.

The purpose of the Clean Air Conservation Act is to enable all people to live in a healthy and comfortable environment, by preventing air pollution which causes harm to people and the environment, and by managing and conserving the atmospheric environment in a proper and sustainable manner (Article 1). And the purpose of the obligation to attach automatic smokestack measuring device is to manage and check the pollutants emitted from the emission outlets (smokestacks) of an emission facility in real-time so that air pollution accidents can be prevented and the transparency in pollutant management can be ensured. Also, it is obligated to attach automatic smokestack measuring devices in the acid treatment facilities of facilities for manufacturing all assembled metal products, etc. Considering such points, it shall be proper based on the regulations to regard that acid treatment facilities among semiconductor manufacturing facilities fall under acid treatment facilities of manufacturing facilities of assembled metal products, etc., and are therefore subject to attachment of automatic smokestack measuring devices.

Meanwhile, in subparagraph 11 of Article 2 of the Clean Air Conservation Act and attached Table 3 of the Enforcement Rules of the same Act legislated as delegated by the Act, emission facilities are specifically categorized. In subparagraph 2 (b) 1) through 37) of the Table, emission facilities and applicable emission facilities are categorized, and item 24) stipulates metal processing products, machinery, devices, equipment, transportation device, and furniture manufacturing facilities, and item 28) prescribes semiconductor manufacturing facilities. With respect to the classification system of emission facilities in attached Table 3, there are arguments that manufacturing facilities for assembled metal products, etc. in subparagraph 1 (r) of attached Table 3 of the Enforcement Decree of the Clean Air Conservation Act do not include semiconductor manufacturing facilities based on the classification system of emissions facilities in attached Table 3 of the Enforcement Rules of the Clean Air Conservation Act, but considering the fact that emission facilities and emission facilities subject to attachment of automatic smokestack measuring device are two separate items and do not have to match the emission facility classification system, the argument is not valid.

Therefore, acid treatment facilities among semiconductor manufacturing facilities fall under acid treatment facilities which are emission facilities subject to attachment of automatic smokestack measuring device pursuant to Article 17 (5) of the Enforcement Decree of the Clean Air Conservation Act and subparagraph 1 (r) 4) of its attached Table 3.

In this case, Article 39 (1) of the Clean Air Conservation Act and note 1 of attached Table 11 of the Enforcement Rules of the same Act apply, requiring the performance of self-measurement at least twice a month

Article 39 of the Clean Air Conservation Act prescribes that while a business entity operates emission facilities, he or she shall perform a self-measurement of pollutants emitted or have a measuring agency designated under Article 16 of the Environmental Testing and Inspection Act perform a measurement, and record the results thereof as they are and retain them, as prescribed by Ministerial Decree of Environment (Paragraph 1), and also stipulates that the subjects, items, and methods of measurement and other matters necessary for measurement shall be prescribed by Ministerial Decree of Environment (paragraph 4). And under Article 52 (5) and attached Table 11 of the Enforcement Rules of the Clean Air Conservation Act legislated as entrusted by the Act, the subjects, items and methods of self-measurement are stipulated, and subparagraph 2 (a) of the same Table prescribes that the number of measurements for class 3 emission outlets shall be at least once per two months, and the measurement items shall be pollutants (excluding fugitive dust among air pollutants) to which the permissible emission levels pursuant to attached Table 8 applies. In addition, subparagraph 1 of attached Table 11 regulates that where the volume of specified hazardous air pollutants emitted from class 3 to 5 emission outlets is no less than the standards prescribed in attached Table 8-2 of the same Rules, self-measurement should be performed for the relevant pollutant at least twice a month, notwithstanding the above Table. And attached Table 8-2 of the same Rules which prescribes the permissible emission level standards applied to specified hazardous air pollutants emitting facilities subject to permission of installation states that the permissible concentration applied to acetaldehydes is 0.01 ppm.

At the same time, Article 16 (1) of the Clean Air Conservation Act regulates that the standards for the permissible emission level for air pollutants from emission facilities shall be prescribed by the Ministerial Decree of Environment, and Article 15 and attached Table 8 of the Enforcement Rules of the Act legislated as entrusted by the Act stipulates the permissible emission level of air pollutants and subparagraph 2 (a) 1 of the same Table regulates that for acetaldehydes, emission facilities are classified as “manufacturing facilities for petroleum and storage facilities for related products, manufacturing facilities for basic organic compounds, wastewater, waste and waste gas incineration facilities, manufacturing facilities for solid and other fuel products”, and the permissible emission level shall be “no more than 10 ppm”.

As such, even if an emission facility is not subject to the permissible emission standards under attached Table 8 of the same Rules, if an emission facility that is equipped with a class 3 emission outlet under subparagraph 2 (a) of attached Table 11 of the same Rules emits the specified hazardous air pollutant acetaldehyde of 0.01 ppm or more, note 1 of the attached Table 11 shall apply, requiring that a self-measurement be performed for the relevant pollutant at least twice a month.

Also, according to subparagraph 9 of Article 2 of the Clean Air Conservation Act, the term "specified hazardous air pollutant" means matter prescribed by Ministerial Decree of Environment among air pollutants subject to watch for hazard, which is acknowledged to require emission control, because it could inflect any harm or injury directly or indirectly on people's health or on the birth and breeding of animals and plants through long-term intake or exposure even if in low concentration. And under Article 23 (8) of the same Act, If the Minister of Environment or the Mayor/Do Governor deems that specified air pollutants emitted from emission make it impracticable to maintain the Environmental Quality Standards or are likely to cause serious harm to the health and property of residents and the birth and breeding of animals and plants, he or she may restrict the installation of emission facilities which emit specified air pollutants. In this regard, specified air pollutants are air pollutants that can harm people or animals and plants, and are managed more strictly than other air pollutants, so even if an emissions facility is not subject to attached Table 8 of the Enforcement Rules of the same Act, class 3 emission outlets of emission facilities that emit specified hazardous air pollutants exceeding a certain level shall be considered to be subject to note 1 of attached Table 11 of the Rules and thus be managed in a strict manner.

Therefore, in this case, Article 39 (1) of the Clean Air Conservation Act and note 1 of attached Table 11 of the Enforcement Rules of the same Act apply, and self-measurement should be performed at least twice a month.

If an employee did not attend work on a weekday that falls on a public holiday, it cannot be deemed that the employee did not show “perfect attendance” under Article 30 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Labor Standards Act. In this regard, the said employee is not excluded from persons who are granted paid holidays under Article 55 (1) of the Labor Standards Act.

The requirement to be guaranteed paid holidays pursuant to Article 55 (1) of the Labor Standards Act is that an employee should show perfect attendance of the contractual working days during one week, and “perfect attendance” under Article 30 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act should be interpreted as attendance or work on all contractual working days, meaning that an employee does not miss work on all contractual working days. However, “contractual working days during one week” under Article 30 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Labor Standards Act presupposes that the days are days on which an employee has the responsibility to provide labor. In this regard, “contractual working days during one week” does not include public holidays, so an employee’s failure to attend work on a public holiday that falls on a weekday cannot be considered absence. Also, if the employee attended or worked on all other contractual working days that is not a public holiday during one week, it shall be considered that the employee has showed perfect attendance during the week, and it is fair to interpret that he/she should be granted paid holidays under Article 55 (1) of the Labor Standards Act.

In conclusion, if an employee did not attend work on a weekday that falls on a public holiday, it cannot be deemed that the employee did not show “perfect attendance” under Article 30 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the Labor Standards Act. In this regard, the said employee is not excluded from persons who are granted paid holidays under Article 55 (1) of the Labor Standards Act.

Yes. If the seller of domestically produced goods, etc. marks the country of origin of domestically produced goods, etc. exempt from the assessment of origin standards as Korea, it constitutes a prohibited act under the subparagraph of Article 33 (4) 1 of the Foreign Trade Act.

Under Article 33 (4) 1 of the Foreign Trade Act, the act of marking a false origin or labelling any misleading mark or origin is prohibited, and Article 35 (3) of the same Act prescribes that Articles 33 (4) 1 and 4 shall apply mutatis mutandis to sellers of domestically produced goods, etc. Also, under the same Act, it is not prescribed that the applicability of Article 33 (4) 1 shall be decided based on whether domestically produced goods are subject to assessment of origin standards or not. In this regard, it can be said that marking the country of origin of domestically produced goods, etc. exempt from assessment of origin standards as Korea constitutes an act prohibited by Article 33 (4) 1 of the Foreign Trade Act, such as the act of marking a false origin or labelling any misleading mark or origin.

Also, the marking of origin scheme prescribed by Article 33 of the Foreign Trade Act, etc. was introduced to protect domestic consumers and to establish fair trade order as the false marking of the origin of imported goods as Korea caused harm to consumers. Also, with the partial amendment of the Foreign Trade Act into Act no. 18885 on June 10, 2022, Article 35 (3) was newly inserted to establish the order in trade of domestically produced goods using imported material by clarifying the legal basis for restricting violations against the rules on marking of origin. In this regard, when the country of origin of domestically produced goods, etc. exempt from assessment of origin standards is marked as Korea, it shall be appropriate to interpret that Article 33 (4) 1 of the Foreign Trade Act shall apply.

Therefore, the act of marking the country of origin of domestically produced goods, etc. exempt from assessment of origin standards as Korea constitutes an act prohibited under Article 33 (4) 1 of the Foreign Trade Act.