When the human changed the perception of existing animals, the problems over animals began to come to the fore in the social level at our country. That is, in the modern times, the civic law stipulated that the animal is one of the simple objects - belonging to a private areas. But, recently, create...
When the human changed the perception of existing animals, the problems over animals began to come to the fore in the social level at our country. That is, in the modern times, the civic law stipulated that the animal is one of the simple objects - belonging to a private areas. But, recently, created is a newly-coined word, companion animal living together with the human - an object of sympathy - as a result of escaping from the concept.
In the process of the discussion, the human had the perception, ‘Though the human has not to recognize the animal as a subject of rights, the human has to have a concernment on the protection or welfare of the animal at the human-centered level as well as at the humanitarian level. In the center of the perception, a problem appears on the surface naturally, concerning how to prohibit from human's abuse of the animal committed among the humans.
In the stream, our country established and enforced 『Law of Animal Protection』in 1991. It took a role as a foundation, by which, in order to prohibit the human from animal abuse, the law of the modern times could recover from a certain limitation. That is, the law of the modern times stipulated animal abuse committed by others, and it had a limitation that the owner, occupant, and operator of the animal (hereafter a person with the right of affecting animals) couldn't be punished, even though they abused the animal. When 『Law of Animal Protection』 took effect, our country could prepare the basis of punishing animal abuse committed by the person with the right of effecting animals.
But, in spite of the efforts made as mentioned above, the person with the right of affecting animals faces the limitation in protecting the companion animals, the objects of property rights. It is because the contents of 『Law of Animal Protection』, a general law concerning the protection of companion animals, can not but be limited, for established is basic rights such as business person's freedom of business and ownership, one of the property rights of animal. For example, even if a person with the right of affecting animals abuses his/her animal, bringing up the animal in the process of collective upbringing, currently, no provision of 『Law of Animal Protection』can separate the animal from the person with the right of affecting animals eternally.
Recently, our country reached the age of 10 million's companion animal. An area of arts affected by the area of philosophy discussed the rights of animals which was over moral position, a film was produced about the perception of animals as members of a family, and a dissertation was presented on the analysis of the film.
In this situation, we face a significant and very difficult subject; how to construct theories legally, when the relation between humans and animals is premised as companion. The subject is, “Can the sauce of the human rights based on anthropocentrism, a principal agent of rights in view of the laws of the modern times and of the present times, be alloted to companion animals, the objects which have sense?” It is impossible if the legal system linked from Roman legal system of the medieval times to the recent legal is not revised on the whole. Strictly speaking, after revising the legal system on the whole, the relation between the human and the animal has to be set up newly. Though, the law system of the modern times was mighty like an iron fortress in the past, now it can not escape from a change.
Here, the subject is what theoretical ground we have to accept on. A lot of subjects are discussed, but Peter Albert David Singer's ‘Prince of Anti-speciesism’ and ‘Principle of Equal Consideration of Interests’ had influence on the subject. It means that the interests of the animal which can feel ‘pain and pleasure’ - the entity which has an ability of sense - has to be considered morally in the same level as that of other species without the consideration of discrimination from other species' interests. But, it does not mean that the animal has to be treated equally or the same, but that it has to be considered so that it can get the same interest as its nature. Peter Albert David Singer's assertion has a significant meaning in that, by denying peciesism, the scholar tries to set up the relation between the human and the animal in the same position rather than in the predominant position. In fact, the theory had influences on animal welfare theory and furthermore on the theory of asserting the animal's right. Many country went through the suits based on the theories. But the laws in the modern times and in the present time regards classic contract theory as a principle, and it is difficult to construct a theory on the principle. So, with regard to this difficulty, the theory of animal protection is created, based on the legal system in the present time. Based on the theory of animal protection process, respective countries prepared the legal system of animal protection. Korea legislated 『Law of Animal Protection』 in 1991, and the law is effective today.
So, it is very important to analyze the theory or thought that respective countries regarded as a foundation of legal system including 『Law of Animal Protection』. This work is one of the important aims.
Continually, we have to consider 『Law of Animal Protection』 itself. As mentioned before, 『Law of Animal Protection』was established under the change in the relation between the human and the animal and stipulated the matter arising between them. The contents of 『Law of Animal Protection』 are various in respective nations, for in reality the relationships between them are various. That is, some animals like a cat or a dog make a companion relation, Some used for the industry, and some used for the laboratory, and some like wild animals live at a wild situation.
『Law of Animal Protection』 of Korea doesn't specify a part of the above items, but stipulates inclusive contents. However, the central contents are related to the companion animal. It is why this study considers on companion animals.
One more matter which should be mentioned in relation with the contents of 『Law of Animal Protection』 is the regulation method. In other words, the regulation method of the law has the difference from the exiting law. For example, with the purpose of attaining the existing law, power methods were used mostly in the past, but like the example described later, in executing 『Law of Animal Protection』, a lot of methods as well as the method are used. It is a very important theme that we can not miss in Law of Animal Protection system.
This study progresses as following structure under the points. Introduction of chapter1 describes the aim, the scope, and the method. Chapter2 analyzes the theoretical groundwork and thoughtful background by which 『Law of Animal Protection』 appears. That is, as a basis of a discussion concerning animal position, this study considers the philosophical theory which asserts human-centered animal welfare, and also considers concrete discussions about animal position; ①a theory of animal position as a property, ②a theory of animal welfare which becomes an object of a companion rather than that of a valuable property, ③a theory of rights surpassing a theory of animal welfare ④a precedent appearing at foreign countries, ⑤a legal system on animal protection appearing at foreign countries. Chapter3 considers the protection legal system for companion animals in Korea. Major contents are ①the general contents such as the aim and the idea of animal protection law; the role of the nation and local self-governing body, ②the contents about animal handlers, the most important in the steps for animal protection, ③the protection of surrounding life circumstances (which may become worsen depending on animal breeding) ④the protection of humans from the animal's attack ⑤animal protection ⑥administrative system. Chapter4 analyzes the legal system for companion animal of Japan as an object of comparative law consideration. The law presents a profitable view. For example, as known from the name, the law rules companion animal protection by suggesting it at the front post. As for the contents, chapter4 presents profitable views such as systematic enforcement of rules over animal handlers. Chapter5 considers the comparison and improvement of companion animal protection legal systems. Major contents are ①the contents of the two countries' legal systems. ②the points of suggestions, ③the improvement of legal system of Korea. Chapter6 leads to the conclusion.
When the human changed the perception of existing animals, the problems over animals began to come to the fore in the social level at our country. That is, in the modern times, the civic law stipulated that the animal is one of the simple objects - belonging to a private areas. But, recently, created is a newly-coined word, companion animal living together with the human - an object of sympathy - as a result of escaping from the concept.
In the process of the discussion, the human had the perception, ‘Though the human has not to recognize the animal as a subject of rights, the human has to have a concernment on the protection or welfare of the animal at the human-centered level as well as at the humanitarian level. In the center of the perception, a problem appears on the surface naturally, concerning how to prohibit from human's abuse of the animal committed among the humans.
In the stream, our country established and enforced 『Law of Animal Protection』in 1991. It took a role as a foundation, by which, in order to prohibit the human from animal abuse, the law of the modern times could recover from a certain limitation. That is, the law of the modern times stipulated animal abuse committed by others, and it had a limitation that the owner, occupant, and operator of the animal (hereafter a person with the right of affecting animals) couldn't be punished, even though they abused the animal. When 『Law of Animal Protection』 took effect, our country could prepare the basis of punishing animal abuse committed by the person with the right of effecting animals.
But, in spite of the efforts made as mentioned above, the person with the right of affecting animals faces the limitation in protecting the companion animals, the objects of property rights. It is because the contents of 『Law of Animal Protection』, a general law concerning the protection of companion animals, can not but be limited, for established is basic rights such as business person's freedom of business and ownership, one of the property rights of animal. For example, even if a person with the right of affecting animals abuses his/her animal, bringing up the animal in the process of collective upbringing, currently, no provision of 『Law of Animal Protection』can separate the animal from the person with the right of affecting animals eternally.
Recently, our country reached the age of 10 million's companion animal. An area of arts affected by the area of philosophy discussed the rights of animals which was over moral position, a film was produced about the perception of animals as members of a family, and a dissertation was presented on the analysis of the film.
In this situation, we face a significant and very difficult subject; how to construct theories legally, when the relation between humans and animals is premised as companion. The subject is, “Can the sauce of the human rights based on anthropocentrism, a principal agent of rights in view of the laws of the modern times and of the present times, be alloted to companion animals, the objects which have sense?” It is impossible if the legal system linked from Roman legal system of the medieval times to the recent legal is not revised on the whole. Strictly speaking, after revising the legal system on the whole, the relation between the human and the animal has to be set up newly. Though, the law system of the modern times was mighty like an iron fortress in the past, now it can not escape from a change.
Here, the subject is what theoretical ground we have to accept on. A lot of subjects are discussed, but Peter Albert David Singer's ‘Prince of Anti-speciesism’ and ‘Principle of Equal Consideration of Interests’ had influence on the subject. It means that the interests of the animal which can feel ‘pain and pleasure’ - the entity which has an ability of sense - has to be considered morally in the same level as that of other species without the consideration of discrimination from other species' interests. But, it does not mean that the animal has to be treated equally or the same, but that it has to be considered so that it can get the same interest as its nature. Peter Albert David Singer's assertion has a significant meaning in that, by denying peciesism, the scholar tries to set up the relation between the human and the animal in the same position rather than in the predominant position. In fact, the theory had influences on animal welfare theory and furthermore on the theory of asserting the animal's right. Many country went through the suits based on the theories. But the laws in the modern times and in the present time regards classic contract theory as a principle, and it is difficult to construct a theory on the principle. So, with regard to this difficulty, the theory of animal protection is created, based on the legal system in the present time. Based on the theory of animal protection process, respective countries prepared the legal system of animal protection. Korea legislated 『Law of Animal Protection』 in 1991, and the law is effective today.
So, it is very important to analyze the theory or thought that respective countries regarded as a foundation of legal system including 『Law of Animal Protection』. This work is one of the important aims.
Continually, we have to consider 『Law of Animal Protection』 itself. As mentioned before, 『Law of Animal Protection』was established under the change in the relation between the human and the animal and stipulated the matter arising between them. The contents of 『Law of Animal Protection』 are various in respective nations, for in reality the relationships between them are various. That is, some animals like a cat or a dog make a companion relation, Some used for the industry, and some used for the laboratory, and some like wild animals live at a wild situation.
『Law of Animal Protection』 of Korea doesn't specify a part of the above items, but stipulates inclusive contents. However, the central contents are related to the companion animal. It is why this study considers on companion animals.
One more matter which should be mentioned in relation with the contents of 『Law of Animal Protection』 is the regulation method. In other words, the regulation method of the law has the difference from the exiting law. For example, with the purpose of attaining the existing law, power methods were used mostly in the past, but like the example described later, in executing 『Law of Animal Protection』, a lot of methods as well as the method are used. It is a very important theme that we can not miss in Law of Animal Protection system.
This study progresses as following structure under the points. Introduction of chapter1 describes the aim, the scope, and the method. Chapter2 analyzes the theoretical groundwork and thoughtful background by which 『Law of Animal Protection』 appears. That is, as a basis of a discussion concerning animal position, this study considers the philosophical theory which asserts human-centered animal welfare, and also considers concrete discussions about animal position; ①a theory of animal position as a property, ②a theory of animal welfare which becomes an object of a companion rather than that of a valuable property, ③a theory of rights surpassing a theory of animal welfare ④a precedent appearing at foreign countries, ⑤a legal system on animal protection appearing at foreign countries. Chapter3 considers the protection legal system for companion animals in Korea. Major contents are ①the general contents such as the aim and the idea of animal protection law; the role of the nation and local self-governing body, ②the contents about animal handlers, the most important in the steps for animal protection, ③the protection of surrounding life circumstances (which may become worsen depending on animal breeding) ④the protection of humans from the animal's attack ⑤animal protection ⑥administrative system. Chapter4 analyzes the legal system for companion animal of Japan as an object of comparative law consideration. The law presents a profitable view. For example, as known from the name, the law rules companion animal protection by suggesting it at the front post. As for the contents, chapter4 presents profitable views such as systematic enforcement of rules over animal handlers. Chapter5 considers the comparison and improvement of companion animal protection legal systems. Major contents are ①the contents of the two countries' legal systems. ②the points of suggestions, ③the improvement of legal system of Korea. Chapter6 leads to the conclusion.
주제어
#companion animal animal handler animal abuse animal abandonment animal registration
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.