DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Current Status and Problems of Direct Construction Mandatory System under the Framework Act on Construction Industry

건설산업기본법 상 직접시공의무제도의 현황과 문제점 - 제도 개선방안을 중심으로 -

  • Ju, Sungjin (Department of Construction Law, Kwangwoon University) ;
  • Shin, Manjoong (College of Policy and Law, Kwangwoon University)
  • 주성진 (광운대학교 건설법무학과) ;
  • 신만중 (광운대학교 정책법학대학)
  • Received : 2022.08.22
  • Accepted : 2022.10.14
  • Published : 2022.11.30

Abstract

In many cases, the construction industry in Korea has a hierarchical structure in which a general contractor in charge of the entire project is subcontracted from the client and entrusts the construction to a specialty contractor in charge of detailed work types. In this structure, the general contractor manages and takes responsibility for the entire construction, but the person directly involved in the construction is an individual specialty contractor, so the quality and safety of the facilities will vary according to their construction and management capabilities. In order to solve quality and safety problems that may arise due to the difference between the person receiving the order for construction and the person who actually constructs it, it is necessary to let the person who receives the order perform the construction directly for projects under a certain amount. The system introduced for this purpose is the direct construction mandatory system. As described above, although this system was introduced to prevent bad construction and risk transfer, it is a system that has various problems due to the characteristics of the domestic construction industry, institutional limitations, and practical problems, so it is necessary to improve it legally and institutionally.

우리나라의 건설산업은 전체 사업을 총괄하는 종합건설사업자가 발주자로부터 도급받아 세부공종을 담당하는 전문건설사업자에게 시공을 맡기는 계층적 구조로 이루어져 있는 경우가 많다. 이러한 구조에서 전체 공사에 대해 종합건설업자가 관리하고 책임을 지지만, 직접적으로 공사에 관여하는 자는 개별 전문공사업자이므로, 이들의 시공 능력과 관리 능력에 따라 시설물 등의 품질과 안전성이 달라지게 된다. 공사를 발주받는 자와 실제 시공하는 자가 달라서 발생할 수 있는 품질과 안전 문제를 해결하기 위해서는 일정 금액 이하의 공사에 한해서는 발주받는 자가 직접시공하도록 하는 것이 필요하며, 이를 위해 도입된 제도가 건설시공직접의무 제도이다. 이와 같이 해당 제도는 부실공사와 위험전가를 방지하기 위해 도입되었지만, 국내 건설산업의 특성과 제도적 한계, 현실적 문제점으로 인해 다양한 문제점을 안고 있는 제도이므로 이를 법적, 제도적으로 개선할 필요가 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Ahn, J.O. (2017). "A plan to rationalize the direct construction mandatory system for the advancement of the construction industry." Land Policy Brief, 599, pp. 1-6.
  2. Ann, J.O., and Lee, S.B., Lee, S.H., Jo, J.H., Kim, J.H., and Hyun, S.Y. (2016). "Advancing the Construction Industry by Amending Self-performing Requirement." Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements, pp. 54-55.
  3. Ann, J.O., Lee, S.B., Lee, S.H., Jo, J.H., Kim, J.H., and Hyun, S.Y. (2016). "Advancing the Construction Industry by Amending Self-performing Requirement." Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements, pp. 60-64.
  4. Ann, J.O., Lee, S.B., Lee, S.H., Jo, J.H., Kim, J.H., and Hyun, S.Y. (2016). "Advancing the Construction Industry by Amending Self-performing Requirement." Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements, pp. 85-86.
  5. Ann, J.O., Lee, S.B., Lee, S.H., Jo, J.H., Kim, J.H., and Hyun, S.Y. (2016). "Advancing the Construction Industry by Amending Self-performing Requirement." Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements, p. 88.
  6. Baek, J.C., and Ock, J.H. (2019). "A Study on the Application Method of Construction Site Direct Construction System." Journal of the Arechitectural Institute of Korea Structure & Construction, 35(11), pp. 171-180.
  7. CAK (2018). 2017 private construction report.
  8. Choi. S.I., Jeon. Y.J., and Lee. K.P. (2021). "Major Issues and Reasonable Settlement Plans for Vitalization of Direct Construction by General Construction Companies." Construction & Economy Research Institute of Korea, pp. 12-13.
  9. Choi. S.I., Jeon. Y.J., and Lee. K.P. (2021). "Major Issues and Reasonable Settlement Plans for Vitalization of Direct Construction by General Construction Companies." Construction & Economy Research Institute of Korea, pp. 38-40.
  10. Choi, H.S. (2008). "Prospects for the development of the Korean construction industry." Construction Management News 3-4, pp. 10-13.
  11. Choi, S.h. (2016). "Direct construction work is also a necessity, not an option." DNEWS, 84, pp. 40-41.
  12. Choi, S.h. (2016). "Direct construction work is also a necessity, not an option." DNEWS, 84, p. 43.
  13. Economic Statistics Bureau Industry Statistics Division. (2020). Construction Industry Investigation Report.
  14. Hong, S.J., and Kim, J.J. (2020). "Cost statistics for subcontract completed construction as of 2019." Korea Research Institute For Construction Policy, p. 6.
  15. Kim, J.W. (2016). A review on the direct construction and safety management of the original contractor.
  16. Korea Mechanical Construction Contractors Association (2006). "Implementation of the mandatory direct construction system for construction works." Monthly Mechanical Construction, Korea Mechanical Construction Contractors Association, 5(190), pp. 57-64.
  17. Korea Research Institute for Human Settlements. (2021). Construction cost statistics for subcontracted completed works.
  18. Lee, M.S., Kim S.Y., Y, J.H., Han, J.Y., and Son, J.W. (2021). "Analysis of the Impact of the Expansion of Direct Construction Works and Suggestions on the Application." Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, KICEM, 22(6), pp. 15-23. https://doi.org/10.6106/KJCEM.2021.22.6.015
  19. Shin, Y.C, (2016). "Necessity of direct construction and improvement plan." DNEWS, 84, pp. 54-55.
  20. Shim, G.B., Back, Y.G., and Kim, J.H. (2010). "Measures to promote direct construction in the construction industry to improve quality and improve competitiveness" Construction & Economy Research Institute of Korea, pp. 27.
  21. Son, Y.J. (2016). "Introduction and improvement direction of direct construction in the professional construction industry." DNEWS, 84, pp. 44-53.
  22. Yu, L.H. (2012). "Analysis of the impact of the extension of the direct construction mandatory of the original contractor on the specialized construction industry." [RICON] policy review, 2012-10, pp. 1-40.