부산대학교 도서관

생태환경 손해배상제도의 개혁이 이루어진 이후 중국의 법률체계에 있어 동일한 생태 관련 손해배상사건에는 두 종류의 소송방식이 존재하게 되었다. 첫째는 기존의 비정부주도형으로 환경보호단체나 검찰이 환경민사공익소송을 제기하는 것이며, 둘째는 행정기관이 생태환경손해배상소송을 제기하는 새로운 정부주도형이다. 소송 중복을 피하기 위해 ‘생태환경 소손해배상 안건에 관한 약간 규정(시행)(关于审理生态环境损害赔偿案件的若干规定(试行)’ 제17조는 정부주도형에 우선적으로 기소할 수 있도록 규정하였는데, 이는 사실상 환경민사공익소송을 보완하는 것으로 중국의 환경공익보호 현실에 맞지 않을 뿐만 아니라, 환경단체들의 환경민사공익소송의 적극성도 떨어뜨린다. 이에 본 연구에서는 두 소송모델 간의 관계를 좀더 깊이 검토하고 양자 간의 기소순위를 적절하게 안배하기 위하여, 비교분석을 통해 두 소송모델의 호환성을 논증하였다. 양자는 본질적으로 모두 생태환경 민사공익 소송의 범주에 속하기 때문에 생태환경 민사공익소송제도의 하나로 충분히 통합될 수 있으며, 그 방안을 제시하였다. 또한, ‘일사부재리’원칙에 따라 두 가지 소송모델을 통합할 수 있는 방안을 모색하였는데, 그 구체적인 방법으로는 단계적 추진 방안으로 두 소송모델 간의 소송순위를 적절하게 안배하여 넓은 의미의 생태환경 민사공익소송 모델을 구축할 수 있는 방안을 제시하였다. 이러한 단계적 소송모델 선택론은 환경사법전문화, 공공환경권익보장, 환경공익보호라는 목표달성에 매우 유리하게 작용하여 중국의 생태환경손해배상소송의 발전을 가져다 줄 것이라 본다.
After the reform of the ecological environment damage compensation system was implemented, China’s legal system has two litigation models against the same ecological environment damage case: environmental protection organizations or procuratorial agencies file civil public interest litigation concerning ecological environment government-led model; a new government-led model in which administrative organs initiate environmental damage compensation suits. In order to avoid problems such as repeated litigation, Article 17 of the Regulations on the Trial of Compensation for Ecological Environment Damage Cases (for Trial Implementation) stipulates that the government-led model has the priority of the prosecution order. This actually regards civil public interest litigation concerning ecological environment as a supplement, therefore, this goes against the actual situation of China’s environmental public interest protection, and will also reduce the enthusiasm of environmental protection organizations to raise civil public interest litigation concerning ecological environment. In order to reflect on the relationship between the two litigation modes and properly arrange their order of litigation, this article first demonstrates the similarities and differences between the two litigation modes through comparative analysis. This article believes that both are essentially civil public interest litigation concerning ecological environment, so they can be integrated into the civil public interest litigation concerning ecological environment system as two specific modes of the system; Based on the principle of “Ne bis in idem”, this paper uses the system integration method to explore the possible path of the system integration of the two litigation modes, and adopts the staged advancing law to properly arrange the sequence of litigation between the two litigation modes to construct a broad civil public interest litigation concerning ecological environment model. Specifically, we should gradually choose the civil public interest litigation concerning ecological environment model, and choose different litigation models in stages. In the first stage, based on China’s actual ecological environment protection, we should adopt a hybrid model and give priority to accepting civil public interest litigation concerning ecological environment initiated by environmental protection organizations or procuratorial institutions under the same conditions. In the second stage, China’s ecological civilization is basically completed, so it can be transitioned to a government-led model. This staged litigation model selectionism is more conducive to the specialization of environmental justice and the realization of the goal of protecting the public’s environmental rights and interests and safeguarding the environmental public interest.