“삼성 비협조로 발암물질 노출규명 불가능”
31일 평소 경제적 어려움을 호소하던 삼성전자서비스 30대 협력업체 직원이 “전태일처럼 못해도 선택했다”는 말을 남기고 스스로 목숨을 끊자 삼성의 비노조 기업행태가 다시 수면 위로 떠오르고 있다.
이런 가운데 AP통신의 삼성 백혈병 노동자 산재인정 판결 기사를 전세계 외신 100여 곳이 타전하며 삼성 문제가 다시 주목 받고 있다.
AP통신은 지난 23일(현지시간) 삼성전자에서 일하다 백혈병으로 숨진 故 김경미 씨의 유족이 근로복지공단을 상대로 낸 유족급여 지급 소송에서 승소한 사실을 보도했다. (☞ ‘AP’통신 기사 원문 보러가기)
<법원: 삼성공장의 자체조사는 작업현장의 건강 유해물질을 온전히 조사하지 못했다>는 제목의 기사에서 AP는 “한국 재판부는 삼성반도체 공장들의 안전도를 파악하기 위한 자체조사가 작업환경의 건강 유해물질을 제대로 조사하지 못했다고 말했다”며 “이는 그동안 삼성이 자신들의 생산 공장이 치명적인 암을 유발시켰다는 비난으로부터 책임을 회피하기 위해 재판부의 조사에 비협조적이었기 때문”이라고 지적했다.
기사는 “재판부가 김씨가 발암물질에 노출이 되었는지 더 이상 규명하는 것은 불가능하다고 말했는데, 이것은 삼성이 협조해주지 않았기 때문”이라며 “삼성이 김씨가 근무하는 동안 사용되었던 화학 물질들의 자료를 보존하지 않았고 영업비밀이라는 이유로 일부 자료를 공개하지 않았다”는 판결문 일부를 전했다.
통신은 이어 “(그럼에도) 사망한 故 김경미씨의 백혈병은 김 씨가 삼성반도체 공장에서 웨이퍼를 화학물질에 담그는 일을 오년 동안 해온 사실과 ‘상당한 인과관계’가 있다”고 판결한 재판 결과를 전했다.
한편 AP는 이번 소송에서 “삼성이 김씨측의 피고가 아니었다”면서 “법원의 결정이 개연성에 근거를 두고 있는 것으로 보이기는 하지만, 소송 당사자가 아닌 우리가 이 사건에 대해서 언급하는 것은 적절치 않은 듯하다”는 삼성의 성명서를 보도하기도 했다.
| 다음은 정상추 네트워크의 ‘AP통신’ 기사 번역 전문 Court: Studies understated Samsung health hazards Court: Studies of Samsung factories fail to fully examine workplace health hazards SEOUL, South Korea (AP) -- A South Korean court said studies conducted to e-valuate safety at Samsung chip factories failed to fully examine workplace health hazards, undermining the electronics giant's efforts to distance itself from claims that its manufacturing plants caused fatal cancers. The finding by the Seoul Administrative Court was part of a ruling in the case of a Samsung Electronics Co. worker who died of leukemia in 2009 at age 29. A panel of three judges said Friday that a "considerable causal relationship" existed between Kim Kyung-mi's leukemia and her five years of work at a Samsung memory chip factory, dipping wafers in chemicals. The judges said Kim must have been exposed to more toxic chemicals than safety studies said existed at Samsung's factories. Samsung, one of the best known South Korean companies and a powerful force in the country's economy, has cited studies that found no dangerous level of benzene, formaldehyde or other carcinogens to ease public concerns about workplace hazards. But the studies did not e-valuate exposure to chemicals during maintenance work, blackouts, gas leaks or other incidents when the level of toxic gas goes up sharply, the judges said. The court ordered the Korea Workers' Compensations & Welfare Service, a government agency, to pay compensation to Kim's family. Claims for compensation for injuries and disease linked to the workplace are decided by the agency, which levies companies to fund its payouts. The agency had previously denied compensation to Kim's family who appealed to the Seoul court. The latest ruling is the second case in South Korea in which a court recognized a link between leukemia and working conditions at Samsung memory chip factories.In 2011, a court said the deaths of two Samsung workers from leukemia were associated with their work at the company and ordered the government agency to pay compensation to their families. The agency appealed and the case is pending. Kim worked at Samsung's chip factory in Giheung between 1999 and 2004 on "Line 2", which was one of the three oldest chip manufacturing lines at Samsung. The two other workers who died of leukemia and won compensation from the government agency worked on these three lines, all of which were built during the 1980s. Lee Jong-ran, an attorney who helps tech industry workers, said most leukemia deaths of Samsung worker were among employees who worked at the old lines. They were shut and renovated after 2006. The judges said there was a "high probability" that benzene, formaldehyde or other leukemia-causing materials were contained in the chemicals Kim used, or created during the manufacturing process. But it said it was not possible to further determine Kim's exposure to carcinogens partly because Samsung hadn't cooperated. "Samsung Electronics, which did not preserve information of chemical materials used during Kim's work and did not disclose some data citing trade secrets, is partly a cause," the ruling said. Samsung was not a defendant in Kim's case. "While the court's decision appears to have been based on probability, as a party that was not a part of the proceedings, we feel that it would be inappropriate for us to comment on the matter," Samsung said in a statement. "Regardless, Samsung's top priority has always been ensuring the health and safety of every person we employ." |
