한국 경비지도사제도의 법규정 변천과정과 함의

Abstract

The private security services industry in Korea is defined as a ‘security services industry’ according to the 「Security Services Industry Act」, and it is possible to operate the industry only with permission from the commissioner of the Metropolitan/Provincial Police Agency. As of the end of 2021, the number of licensed corporations is 4,342, the number of business fields is 5,143, and the number of deployed security guards is 186,609. And the number of security instructors appointed and deployed in the field to guide, supervise, and educate security guards has reached 8,017. In the security instructor exam, which is a national technical qualification certificate, the number of passers by the 22nd exam has reached 25,024. The security instructor system introduced to improve the quality of security guards deployed nationwide and to develop the private security services industry has improved and supplemented loop holes by amending the ordinance of the Security Services Industry Act according to the changing times and social environment. Nevertheless, there are still voices from the industry and the academic field for improving the legal system to secure the effectiveness of the security instructor system. The purpose of this study was to find the meaning and implications, and to discuss the development direction of the security instructor system in Korea by recognizing the need for continuous study on the system, and by considering the transition process of its legal regulations from the legal point of view for the development of the private security services industry.
 As a result of the study, the timely revision (based on the effective date) of the security instructor system-related regulations under the Security Services Industry Act has been carried out a total of 11 times. A total of 3 revisions were made to strengthen regulations, 6 revisions were made to ease regulations, and 2 revisions were made to improve and supplement some loop holes.
 The major revisions with strengthened regulations included strengthening the requirements for permission for the security services industry, strengthening the reasons for disqualification of security instructors, expanding the duties of security instructors, and providing standards for administrative measures. The major revisions with mitigated regulations included mitigating the reasons for disqualification of security instructors, lowering the age for acquiring the security instructor certificate, removing physical conditions, mitigating the criteria for suspension of qualification, increasing the business autonomy of security business operators by abolishing the regulations on submission of security instructor deployment plans, lowering basic training hours for security instructors, exempting from common education upon completion of basic training, expanding exemptions for the security instructor exam, reducing the intensity of job performance, and expanding test opportunities and securing stability by stipulating the security instructor exam cycle at least once a year. In the future, continuous discussion and research on issues and areas that have not been dealt with in depth so far in relation to the revision of legal regulations should be conducted.