본 연구의 목적은 북한의 특수성을 고려하여 북한의 핵무기와 화학무 기, 생물무기를 포함하는 대량살상무기 폐기를 위한 협력적 위협감소 (CTR) 프로그램의 적용방안을 모색하는 것이다. 북한의 대량살상무기 폐 기를 위해서는 국제레짐, 다자안보협의체 등을 활용한 협력안보 차원에 서 접근해야 한다. 그 대표적인 방안이 미국의 협력적 위협감소(CTR) 프 로그램이라고 할 수 있다. CTR 프로그램은 ‘넌-루가 프로그램’이라고도 하는데, CTR은 핵무기뿐만 아니라 화학무기, 생물무기 등 대량살상무기 전반의 제거를 목표로 하는 포괄적 프로그램이다. 구소련 3국에 적용되 었던 CTR은 좋은 선례이기는 하지만, 북한에 적용하기 위해서는 북한의 특수성이 고려되어야 한다. 그 특수성은 북한이 처한 안보환경의 차이, 대량살상무기 개발에 투자한 기회비용과 동인, 비대칭 군비통제에 따른 보상방안을 들 수 있다. CTR의 북한 적용을 위해서는 북한의 특수성을 감안한 북한의 안보환경 고려, 북한 대량살상무기 실태 파악, 경제적 보 상과 재원마련 대책, 북한식 CTR 모델 정립, 사찰 및 검증방안 마련이 필요하다.

Considering the situation in the early 20th century when the existing urban system centered on urban areas began to change, the biggest factors causing urban structural changes in urban areas are construction of railroad and urban dismantling. The change process of Eupseong, in the microscopic viewpoint, can be understood as a process of change in the course of dismantlement of town's demarcation, improvement of accessibility and urban expansion due to the construction of railroads, process of urban expansion following the crumbling boundaries and structural changes. This study aimed to look at the transformation process of the Eupseong in the early 20th century, focusing on the demolition of the castle and the railway construction from a microscopic point of view of city.

This study has attempted to investigate current asbestos laws in the amended Occupational Safety and Health Act on the removal and disposal of asbestos. Among 800 registered asbestos removal and disposal companies, 499 firms were investigated from August 7 to December 10, 2009. The qualified inspectors (those with Industrial Hygiene Engineer’s License or higher-level technical license) are educated for more than three hours before starting the inspection. In terms of regional distribution, Gyeonggi / Incheon was the highest with 105 companies(21%), followed by Daegu / Gyeongbuk(100, 20%), Chungbuk(97, 19.4%), Jeonbuk(37, 7.4%), Gwangju / Jeonnam (35, 7.0%) and Seoul(33, 6.6%). In terms of the number of education and technical assistances(1,348 in total) among 499 asbestos removal and disposal companies ,‘personal protective equipment and putting it on(287, 21.3%)’ was the highest, followed by ‘safety & health actions by asbestos removal and disposal work(171, 12.7%),’ ‘hazard of asbestos(168, 12.5%),’ ‘NO SMOKING and NO FOOD(164, 12.2%)’ and ‘prevention of asbestos fibers from being airborne(12, 0.9%).’A questionnaire consisted of 11 questions regarding the obse tance of enforcement ordinances associated with the removal and disposal of asbestos. According to an investigation on the current status of the workplace based on inspectors’ checklists, 3 scores were maintained in average. This paper has limitations because it has failed to randomly investigate the workplace because it is very strict to visit the asbestos removal and disposal sites.

최근 미-북간 관계 개선 등으로 인하여 북핵 문제가 핵 검증단계로 진전될 것이라는 예상이 나오고 있다. 이제부터 우리 정부는 북핵 프로그램의 성공적 검증·폐기를 위해, 북한의 신고 후 전개될 상황에 대비하여 철저히 준비해야 한다. 본 논문에서는 구소련과 이라크의 대량살상무기 검증·폐기 사례로부터 두 나라의 대량살상무기 검증·폐기 과정에서 발생한 문제점을 조사·분석하여, 북핵 검증·폐기 과정 시 발생할 수 있는 문제점을 파악하고 이를 방지하기 위한 정책적 고려사항을 도출하는데 목적을 두었다.

This paper has attempted to analyze asbestos dismantlement and removal companies' licensing procedure and their work satisfaction and observance of laws and regulations and discover problems for improvement of the current system. In terms of the number of asbestos dismantlement and removal companies by region, Seoul and Gyeonggi (32, 43.2%) were the highest, followed by Jeonnam, Jeonbuk and Jeju (19, 25.7%), Gyeongnam and Gyeongbuk / Chungnam and Chungbuk (8 apiece, 10.8%) and Gangwon (7, 9.5%). In terms of the number of asbestos dismantlement and removal works, it has rapidly increased from 33 cases (1.4%) in 2005 to 598 (25.1%) in 2007 and 1,599 (67.2%) in 2008. In terms of preliminary investigation on asbestos, asbestos-related education and work environment by region, a significant statistical difference has been observed. According to analysis on the asbestos dismantlement and removal companies' satisfaction (in terms of the appropriateness of dismantlement and removal cost), 'unsatisfied (35 companies, 47.3%)' was the highest, followed by 'not bad (20, 27.0%)' and 'satisfied (19, 25.7%),' showing high dissatisfaction on the cost. In terms of the asbestos dismantlement and removal companies' satisfaction at work, Factor 1 accounted for 39.3% while Factor 2 was 16.8%, which showed 56.2% in total.