Consideration of losses and legal issues related to negative radiation rumours in Korea

Abstract

Since the Fukushima NPP accident in Japan in 2011, negative rumours about radioactivity and radiation in general have been spreading in Korea for more than 12 consecutive years, causing various social conflicts as well as actual physical losses. Industry stakeholders have suffered significant losses due to the collapse of fisheries, the voluntary short-term closure of schools, denuclearisation policies, road asphalt restoration projects, a bed manufacturing business collapse, the closure of seawater desalination facilities, thyroid cancer lawsuits, etc. The scientific basis for the spread of negative radioactivity rumours in Korea all contain radiological levels far below 100 mSv. This is all related to the interpretation and application of the LNT model. Since the losses due to radiation-related rumours after the Fukushima NPP accident are based on the ICRP recommendations, the relationship between legal effects and losses should be sufficiently addressed to provide criteria for preventing future losses. The use of radiation is related to several fundamental human rights under the Constitution. Therefore, it is necessary to consider whether the ICRP recommendations comprehensively reflect the balance of these constitutional rights.

Keywords

Radiation rumours Recommendation LNT hypothesis Binding force Legal effect

1. INTRODUCTION

Since the Fukushima NPP accident in Japan in 2011, negative rumours about radioactivity and radiation have been spreading in Korea for more than 12 consecutive years, causing various social conflicts as well as actual physical losses (Choi, 2014; Hwang and Lee, 2014; Kang, 2015; Go, 2021; Lee, 2021). New negative issues have emerged such as radioactive fish, radioactive rain, radon mattresses, caesium roads, thyroid cancer in locals living near NPPs, the closure of seawater desalination facilities, tritium water, denuclearisation policies, and nuclear contaminated water (Kim and Park, 2015; Lee and Kim; 2016; Lee, 2021; Jung et al., 2022). Industry stakeholders have suffered significant losses due to the collapse of fisheries, the voluntary short-term closure of schools, denuclearisation policies, road asphalt restoration projects, a bed manufacturing business collapse, the closure of seawater desalination facilities, thyroid cancer lawsuits, etc (Choi et al., 2016; Cho and Kim, 2018). Most of the various losses and damages caused by radioactivity rumours in Korea are related to problems with the interpretation of LNT and dose limits established for the general public. This is the result of public opinion about the risks under the ICRP recommendation that most highlighted examples exceed 1 mSv. ICRP has contributed greatly to ensuring the safety of humans around the world by recommending principles of protection against radiation exposure. However, the interpretation of the LNT hypothesis can lead to many misunderstandings. The ICRP recommendation on dose limits for the general public has led to a wide range of calculated losses and significant other damage. Therefore, it is necessary to raise the question of whether it is desirable for ICRP to agree only to conservative recommendations based on the realistic examples aforementioned.

Korea has yet to make a comprehensive estimate of actual financial losses and social conflict. Public opinion tends to recognise that radioactivity is very dangerous. Additionally, administrative agencies tend to take administrative actions under the influence of public opinion and politics (Lee, 2023a). This social phenomenon has become a distinct feature in Korea following the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan. There are far more administrative actions due to public opinion than due to actual radiation exposure incidents. In the future, a comprehensive diagnosis and evaluation of social losses and damages caused by radioactivity rumours are required. This study presents cases of major radioactivity issues in Korea and examines actual financial losses and social conflicts which have occurred.

Table 1.
Major radioactivity issues in Korea since the Fukushima nuclear accident.

Year Core issues RI Radioactivity (Bq)/effective dose (Sv) Social conflict and financial loss

2011* Radioactive rain
Temporary school closures
School playground radioactivity concerns I-131, Cs-137 0.0062 mSv (Information by media)
0.62 μSv h⁻¹ (maximum) Violation of students’ right to education
Causing social chaos
Fish market closures
No official estimates of economic losses

2012^† Radioactive asphalt on the road Cs-137 1.4 μSv h⁻¹ (highest value)
Approximately 0.51 to 0.69 mSv, which is about 1/6 to 1/4 of the domestic average annual dose of 3 mSv Economic loss to local governments: screening costs of approximately 483.25 million won
Economic loss: processing cost estimated at 6 billion won
Litigation between the central government and local governments causes conflict
Transport of 2.15 million tons of radioactive waste
No official estimates of economic losses

2013^‡ Radioactive fish Cs-137 The average intake of 10 kg of caesium-contaminated fish at 100 Bq/kg is 0.016 mSv (information from the government)
Estimated to be less than 1 mSv Economic loss: a sharp decline in fish sales at the fish market, closure of raw fish restaurants, etc.
Creating social chaos in some instances
There was an international lawsuit regarding the import of seafood with Japan
No official estimates of economic losses

2014^§ Thyroid cancer lawsuit by NPP residents^††† I Estimated to be less than 1 mSv Litigation costs between NPP residents and nuclear power generation companies
Conflict between residents living in nuclear power plant areas and the Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power company
No official estimates of economic losses

2015^¶ Closure of a seawater desalination facility because of tritium H-3 Tritium 1.3 Bq/L or less Economic loss of at least 195.4 billion KRW due to the facility closure
No official estimates of economic losses

2016^ Popular movies about
nuclear disasters - In the movie, symptoms of vomiting and skin damage appear due to radiation exposure Policy change from pro-nuclear power plant to a nuclear phase-out country
Creating public fear of nuclear power generation rather than calculated losses
No official estimates of economic losses

2017^†† Denuclearisation policies - There has been no actual radiation exposure
Creating public anxiety about radioactivity Analysis shows that the cumulative loss of electricity production costs due to a nuclear phase-out policy will exceed 1000 trillion won over the next 30 years
Estimated economic losses of 47.4 trillion won by 2030

2018^‡‡ Radon problems in bed mattresses Rn 620 Bq/cm³
0.15 mSv per year (maximum) Closure of a famous bed manufacturing company
Bed company workers were deprived of their right to survive
No official estimates of economic losses
There has been no state compensation for damage and loss

2019^§§ Tritium in the urine of children living near NPPs H-3 2.8 Bq/L of tritium in children's urine was information provided by the government
17.3 Bq/L of tritium in children's urine was information provided by environmental groups Causing social chaos
No official estimates of economic losses

2020^¶¶ Fukushima contaminated water H-3
Sr-90
Ru-106
I-129
At-125
Cs-137
Cs-134 Tritium 1468 Bq/L There are actual losses due to poor sales at the fish market
No official estimates of economic losses

2021^* Tritium in the Wolseong NPP H-3 Tritium in seawater 1.06–5.23 Bq/L or 1.14–6.47 Bq/L Growing regional conflict with environmental groups
No official estimates of economic losses

Year	Core issues	RI	Radioactivity (Bq)/effective dose (Sv)	Social conflict and financial loss
2011*	Radioactive rain Temporary school closures School playground radioactivity concerns	I-131, Cs-137	0.0062 mSv (Information by media) 0.62 μSv h⁻¹ (maximum)	Violation of students’ right to education Causing social chaos Fish market closures No official estimates of economic losses
2012^†	Radioactive asphalt on the road	Cs-137	1.4 μSv h⁻¹ (highest value) Approximately 0.51 to 0.69 mSv, which is about 1/6 to 1/4 of the domestic average annual dose of 3 mSv	Economic loss to local governments: screening costs of approximately 483.25 million won Economic loss: processing cost estimated at 6 billion won Litigation between the central government and local governments causes conflict Transport of 2.15 million tons of radioactive waste No official estimates of economic losses
2013^‡	Radioactive fish	Cs-137	The average intake of 10 kg of caesium-contaminated fish at 100 Bq/kg is 0.016 mSv (information from the government) Estimated to be less than 1 mSv	Economic loss: a sharp decline in fish sales at the fish market, closure of raw fish restaurants, etc. Creating social chaos in some instances There was an international lawsuit regarding the import of seafood with Japan No official estimates of economic losses
2014^§	Thyroid cancer lawsuit by NPP residents^†††	I	Estimated to be less than 1 mSv	Litigation costs between NPP residents and nuclear power generation companies Conflict between residents living in nuclear power plant areas and the Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power company No official estimates of economic losses
2015^¶	Closure of a seawater desalination facility because of tritium	H-3	Tritium 1.3 Bq/L or less	Economic loss of at least 195.4 billion KRW due to the facility closure No official estimates of economic losses
2016^**	Popular movies about nuclear disasters	-	In the movie, symptoms of vomiting and skin damage appear due to radiation exposure	Policy change from pro-nuclear power plant to a nuclear phase-out country Creating public fear of nuclear power generation rather than calculated losses No official estimates of economic losses
2017^††	Denuclearisation policies	-	There has been no actual radiation exposure Creating public anxiety about radioactivity	Analysis shows that the cumulative loss of electricity production costs due to a nuclear phase-out policy will exceed 1000 trillion won over the next 30 years Estimated economic losses of 47.4 trillion won by 2030
2018^‡‡	Radon problems in bed mattresses	Rn	620 Bq/cm³ 0.15 mSv per year (maximum)	Closure of a famous bed manufacturing company Bed company workers were deprived of their right to survive No official estimates of economic losses There has been no state compensation for damage and loss
2019^§§	Tritium in the urine of children living near NPPs	H-3	2.8 Bq/L of tritium in children's urine was information provided by the government 17.3 Bq/L of tritium in children's urine was information provided by environmental groups	Causing social chaos No official estimates of economic losses
2020^¶¶	Fukushima contaminated water	H-3 Sr-90 Ru-106 I-129 At-125 Cs-137 Cs-134	Tritium 1468 Bq/L	There are actual losses due to poor sales at the fish market No official estimates of economic losses
2021^***	Tritium in the Wolseong NPP	H-3	Tritium in seawater 1.06–5.23 Bq/L or 1.14–6.47 Bq/L	Growing regional conflict with environmental groups No official estimates of economic losses

Although there are no measured radioactivity levels for each school, regulatory agencies have officially published the radioactivity levels measured at radioactivity measurement stations in each province. Each school was allowed to decide individually when to close its school. There are no reports of actual losses or legal issues.

†

There are measurements of radioactive contamination of roads, but only some reports of legal problems or actual losses. There is also some information about legal proceedings.

‡

There was no real-time monitoring on the issue of Fukushima contaminated water, but Korea is providing real-time information on marine environmental radioactivity measurements in relation to the discharge of Fukushima treated water in 2023. However, there is no comprehensive report on actual losses and legal issues within the fishing industry.

There is a ruling on a lawsuit between residents of a nuclear power area and Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power. The actual radiation exposure dose is estimated to be below the dose limit for the general public. There is no scientific evidence that thyroid cancer in residents living in nuclear power plant areas is related to nuclear power. There is no comprehensive report on the results of these conflicts.

There are various news reports on radioactivity measurements from seawater desalination facilities near the Gori NPP. However, there is no comprehensive report on legal issues or actual losses other than measurements of the amount of radioactivity. All of the measurements are radioactive levels below the dose limit for the general public.

Although the Pandora movie did not indicate the amount of radiation exposure, it included a message about death from radiation exposure. There is only a summary and a suggestion that the movie is not factual by some experts. Although the movie had an impact on nuclear phase-out, there is no comprehensive survey or report on this topic.

††

There is no comprehensive report on the energy change roadmap related to nuclear phase-out. The lawsuit is ongoing, and a comprehensive report on the balance between safety and development, legal losses, etc., has not been prepared. The nuclear phase-out did not have a direct impact on the ICRP recommendation or the LNT hypothesis, but it was possible that it generated a fear of radioactivity.

‡‡

There is a report on radon measurement amounts from the government, but there is no comprehensive report on legal issues, actual financial losses, etc. It is within the dose limit for the general public and within the LNT hypothesis range.

§§

Environmental groups and local residents living near nuclear power plants worked together to spread information about the dangers of internal exposure to tritium from NPPs. Environmental groups and local residents living near NPPs worked together to spread information about the dangers of internal exposure to tritium from NPPs. A government measurement group and a private cooperative measurement group were formed to measure radioactivity.

¶¶

After the Fukushima NPP accident, negative rumours about radioactivity were spread by continuously calling it: Fukushima contaminated water, stored water, treated water, and discharged water.

***

A tritium verification team, including government and private organisations, was formed, and a report on the amount of radioactivity was published.

†††

There are various news reports on radioactivity measurements from seawater desalination facilities near the Gori NPP. However, there is no comprehensive report on legal issues or actual losses other than measurements of the amount of radioactivity. All of the measurements display radioactive amounts below the dose limit for the general public.

2. METHODS

It is necessary to review the negative radiation rumours and their impacts in Korea over the past 12 years since the Fukushima NPP accident and to consider the effectiveness and binding force of the law. The purpose of this review is to consider the responsibility of the ICRP recommendations.

Firstly, it is necessary to consider the case review of negative radiation rumours that have emerged throughout the media. Secondly, it is necessary to consider the actual financial and physical losses due to negative radiation rumours. Thirdly, it is necessary to review the binding and legal effects of the ICRP recommendations on losses due to negative radiation rumours based on legal principles. Lastly, it is necessary to consider the higher responsibility and overall influence of ICRP.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

3.1. Cases and characteristics of negative radioactivity rumours

Some key terms connected to negative radiation rumours include deformities, cancer, effects on the human body, harm to children, and contaminated food products. This negative terminology issue is directly related to individual concerns. Radioactivity, as stated in negative radioactivity rumours, is connected to caesium, iodine, tritium, and radon (Kim et al., 2019; Yang and Kim, 2021; Lee, 2023b). These radioactive isotopes are measured elsewhere in nature (Choi and Rhee, 2020). Keywords and the overall focus of radioactive rumour spreaders are based on worry, concern, and emotions. The subject matter is also connected to children, daily life, health, and personal issues. Conversely, keywords and frameworks used by experts are related to facts, numbers, and science. Scientific terms, such as Bq and Sv, are universal terms commonly used. Radiation and radioactivity are scientific phenomena which are distant from personal perspectives.

Images of radiation that have been released by the media focus on dangers, mutations, cancers, and radioactive contamination of all places and objects. This includes household goods, beds, schools, areas around nuclear power plants, infrastructure, harm to children, tritium, caesium, iodine, and risk litigation.

Negative issues are communicated frequently and continuously to the public using undesirable images of radiation. Even today, 12 years after the Fukushima incident, there is no comprehensive diagnostic report on how the public understands radioactive rumours and scientific facts and what social losses have been caused by the rumours in the long term. In the future, there is not even a comprehensive strategy and communication platform on how to communicate with the public on the topic of radiation. However, the science behind the negative radioactivity rumours being spread in Korea all contain radiological levels far below 100 mSv (Table 1).

3.2. Relationship between radioactivity rumours and ICRP recommendations

The scientific basis for the spread of negative radioactivity rumours in Korea all contain radiological levels far below 100 mSv. This is all related to the interpretation and application of the LNT model (Boice, 2017). In addition, some of these examples are related to violations of laws and regulations related to radiation protection in Korea. The Korean Nuclear Safety Act aims to prevent radiation disasters and ensure public safety through the reasonable establishment of radiation protection by applying ICRP recommendations. The purpose of the Act on Protective Action Guidelines Against Radiation in the Natural Environment: Article 1 (Purpose) is to protect citizens’ health and the environment, improve the quality of life, and contribute to public safety by prescribing matters regarding safe control of radiation that citizens may be exposed to in their daily lives. The Act also follows ICRP recommendations.

The proposals for dose limits in the ICRP recommendations are followed by each country. Korea also sets the annual dose limit of 1 mSv for the general public according to the ICRP recommendation. However, the recommended standard of 1 mSv is a problem for most of the losses caused by negative radiation rumours in Korea. To be more precise, ICRP Publication 103 recommends, ‘For public exposure in planned exposure situations, the Commission continues to recommend that the limit should be expressed as an effective dose of 1 mSv in a year’ (UNSCEAR, 2000; ICRP, 2007a). However, in the interpretation related to public radiation rumours, there is no special meaning in whether planned exposure is included or not in the dose limit for the general public. This is because radiation rumours are explained based on mixed information about planned exposure and non-planned exposure. Since the losses due to radiation-related rumours after the Fukushima NPP accident are based on the ICRP recommendations, the relationship between legal effects and losses should be sufficiently addressed to provide criteria for preventing future losses. The actual loss and damage caused by negative radiation rumours in Korea has been enormous. These losses fall below the dose limit for the general public, and there appear to be limitations in understanding and applying the LNT hypothesis.

In the Korean Nuclear Safety Act and the Act on Protective Action Guidelines against Radiation in the Natural Environment, the dose limit for the general public is 1 mSv per year. Many countries will set the dose limit for the general public at 1 mSv, following the ICRP recommendations. It is questionable whether ICRP recommendations do not have the force of law. It is necessary to discuss in-depth the adverse effects of the LNT models, the responsibility of ICRP recommendations, legal effect, and binding force, etc., through domestic cases.

3.3. Discussion of legal binding and effect

The standards of international organisations do not have any legal binding force.¹ According to ICRP Publication 104, although the recommendations are described as having no legal effect or binding force, they actually have an impact on the laws and regulations of each country (ICRP, 2007b).

In addition to formal laws, legal norms that have the effect of law are collectively called substantive laws. Once a law takes effect, the state agency that is connected has the obligation to base its actions on the law. The effect of a law provides a clue to the general binding force of the target law when the constitutional court determines a law to be unconstitutional (Hong, 2020).

A law exerts a general binding force that binds all state agencies and citizens because of its original legal effect (Wolff and Otto, 1974). It is questionable whether ICRP recommendations can be said to be free from binding and legal effects. This is because the law on radiation protection follows the direction of ICRP recommendations. The general principle of law is that international standards are not legally binding, and there is no way to enforce them (Cho, 2018). However, regardless of the loss due to radiation exposure within the ICRP recommendations, the actual material damage and calculated losses which have occurred due to the application of the LNT hypothesis and negative radioactivity rumours must be considered.

3.4. Discussion on strengthening responsibility for ICRP recommendations

Justification of ICRP recommendations must first consider the balance between the right to development and the right to be protected from harm (risks) related to behaviours involving radiation exposure (the right to safety). This is a fundamental consideration for the ICRP’s accountability in the related industry. The basic principle considered in all legislative processes in each country is that effectiveness (reasonable usability in real life) and expertise (scientific evidence) must be considered simultaneously (Pattinson, 2010; Trakman and Sharma, 2014). Based on the fact that the ICRP recommendations consider the right to be protected from harm (risks) more important, they tend to give relatively less consideration to the rights of humans to seek comfort from the development of radiation and the nuclear industry. If the balance between rights is not sufficiently considered, it may be difficult for the ICRP recommendations to gain sustained support.

Within the ICRP recommendations, the classification of radiation exposure focuses on radiation protection as highlighted herein. Discussions about fundamental rights under the Constitution must also consider procedural legitimacy. In other words, there must be sufficient discussion on the effectiveness of recommendations based on scientific evidence. The legislative process should generally include a process of difficult discussion making processes among all stakeholders involved. It is clear that sometimes conflict may be involved in this process.

Article 96, Paragraph 2 of the UN Charter states as follows: ‘Other organs of the United Nations and specialized agencies, which may at any time be so authorized by the General Assembly, may also request advisory opinions of the Court on legal questions arising within the scope of their activities’. Therefore, IAEA and ICRP can request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice. The scope of the request is limited to legal issues arising within the scope of activities of the specialised organisation. Article 65 of the advisory opinions of Chapter IV of the Charter of the United Nations states as follows: ‘The Court may give an advisory opinion on any legal question at the request of whatever body may be authorized by or in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations to make such a request’ (UN, 2023). Therefore, it is also necessary to verify this before legal issues arise based on the relevance of actual losses resulting from ICRP recommendations.

4. CONCLUSION

The ICRP recommendations have provided guidance and helped each country develop regulations on radiation exposure risks for a long time. This is the public benefit of the ICRP recommendations. However, substantive losses continue to occur due to an unrealistic interpretation and application of the LNT hypothesis. Even though there is no risk from radiation exposure, sufficient consideration is not given to financial or physical loss or various social side effects that can occur. The ICRP recommendations focus solely on the management of losses and risks associated with radiation exposure. It must be noted that the use of radiation is related to several fundamental human rights under the Constitution. Therefore, it is necessary to consider whether the ICRP recommendations comprehensively reflect the balance of these constitutional rights.

Although this case was limited to Korea, I believe that actual losses can be reduced and accountability can be made stronger by sufficiently considering the side effects of the interpretation and application of the LNT hypothesis when revising the ICRP recommendations.

Footnotes

Notes

References

Boice

J.D.

Jr , 2017. The linear nonthreshold (LNT) model as used in radiation protection: an NCRP update. Int J Radiat Biol. 93(10). 1079–1092.

Cho

H.J.

Kim

H.K.

, 2018. Exploring consumer perceptions of recalls on product defects. Korea Acad. Bus. Ethics. 18(1), 141–173.

Cho

Y.H.

, 2018. A new just war as an international norm in the 21 century: issues and prospect of responsibility to protect. Korean J. Humanit. Soc. Sci. 42(3), 73–96.

Choi

E.H.

, 2014. A comparative Foucauldian discourse analysis of Korean and German TV news: a case study of Fukushima nuclear accident on March 2011. Korean J. Commun. Stud. 22(2), 145–179.

Choi

W.S.

Hong

J.Y.

Lee

B.H.

, 2016. The effects of news report of Japan’s radioactivity leak accident on fishery products consumption behavior. Korean J. Agric. Manag. Policy. 43(2), 474–487.

Choi

Rhee

S.W.

, 2020. Selection of indicator radio-nuclide for confirmation of contamination of imported wastes. Proc. Autumn Conf. Korea Soc. Waste Manag. 82.

I.S.

, 2021. Public safety is more important than the tritium debate. Electric Power 15(2), 4.

Hong

K.H.

, 2020. The reconstruction of the effects of administrative acts, which is based on an independent theory of the effects of administrative acts - historical and theoretical comparative analysis of so-called Gong-jeong-ryeok, durability and binding effect. Public Law. 49(1), 117–150.

Hwang

Y.J.

Lee

D.S.

, 2014. The effects of Japan’s nuclear power plant accident on agricultural food products in Korea. Korea Rural Econ. Inst. 1–96.

10.

ICRP, 2007a. The 2007 Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 103. Ann. ICRP 37 (2-4).

11.

ICRP, 2007b. Scope of radiological protection control measures. ICRP Publication 104. Ann. ICRP 37 (5).

12.

Jung

J.S.

Lee

H.J.

Kim

S.G.

, 2022. Estimation of the carryover effect of Japanese radiation-related news on domestic seafood consumption. J. Korea Converg. Soc. 13(4), 373–381.

13.

Kang

J.H.

, 2015. A study on the consumption of fishery products in relation with radioactivity-related safety information. J. Fish. Bus. Adm. 46(1), 145–155.

14.

Kim

S.Y.

Lee

Y.J.

Jung

Y.H.

Shon

J.K.

, 2019. Performance test results of tritium analysis of urine samples for nuclear power plants workers. Korean Energy Soc. 10, 212.

15.

Kim

Y.D.

Park

K.K.

, 2015. Factors on social amplification of risk: An analysis of asphalt road radiation event with a modified SARF. Korean Policy Stud. Rev. 24(1), 225–262.

16.

Lee

D.H.

, 2023a. In the Fukushima contaminated water controversy, did science and media play their role? Kwanhun Journal 65(3), 11–18.

17.

Lee

, 2021. The Wolseong Unit 1 controversy continues, ‘from economic feasibility to tritium leakage’: Political circles clash ‘Public safety’ vs. ‘fake news’ Nuclear Safety and Security Commission forms a ‘private investigation team’ regarding tritium leak. Korea Electric Assoc. Electr. J. 17.

18.

Lee

H.Y.

, 2023b. Contaminated water from Japan's Fukushima nuclear power plant, ‘Data is inaccurate, inadequate, inconsistent’: debate held by foreign experts on discharge of contaminated water from Fukushima held experts from PIF scientists ‘Confirm safety, no discharge’. Electric Power 17(2), 34–35.

19.

Lee

J.H.

Kim

J.H.

, 2016. Local residents’ perception analysis of nuclear power after the thyroid cancer damage lawsuit adjacent to the nuclear plant. J. Korean Soc. Radiol. 10(8), 583–590.

20.

Lee

J.Y.

, 2021. Tritium controversy at Wolseong nuclear power plant unit 3, ‘level as low as 6 bananas’. Electric power. 15(2), 54–55.

21.

Pattinson

, 2010. Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect: Who Should Intervene? Oxford University Press, Oxford.

22.

Trakman

Sharma

, 2014. The binding force of agreements to negotiate in good faith. Cambridge Law J. 73(3), 598–628.

23.

UN, 2023. Charter of the United Nations and Statute of the International Court of Justice. Chapter XIV. The international Court of justice. Article 96, 1. United Nations, New York. Available at: https://legal.un.org/repertory/art96.shtml (last accessed 22 April 2025).

24.

UNSCEAR, 2000. Sources and effects of ionizing radiation. 2000. R 2000 Report to the General Assembly, with Scientific Annexes Vol I. United Nations, New York.

25.

Wolff

H.J.

Otto

, 1974. Verwaltungsrecht I, 9. Aufl., München.

26.

Yang

Kim

T.Y.

, 2021. Selection of inundation vulnerable areas using the risk assessment: case study for Busan near urban watershed and coast. Crisis and emergency management: theory and praxis. Crisisonomy. 17(5), 159–185.