대체식품 표시광고 규제에 대한 비교법적 연구

Abstract

As more and more people do not consume animal ingredients for various reasons such as environmental sustainability, animal welfare, and religious beliefs, “alternative foods” that can supplement nutrients that may be lacking for these people are drawing attention. The term “alternative food” means food manufactured and processed to have a similar taste and texture to existing food by replacing animal-based materials with other ingredients. The alternative food currently on sale only aims to replace existing food, and there are no safety problems because it uses raw materials that have been recognized for safety. These alternative foods have grown through publicity and advertising using meat labeling, such as meat, milk, or cooking names(tteokgalbi, bulgogi, etc.). However, controversy over the labeling of alternative foods has arisen around the world as the traditional livestock industry has claimed the use of meat labeling for alternative foods. In the United States, there are no federal-level alternative food labeling laws, so the state government allows, prohibits, or waits for meat labeling of alternative foods depending on the state's major industries. In states where the state law prohibits meat labeling of alternative foods, lawsuits are continuing between alternative food companies that oppose it. At the EU level, dairy labeling of alternative foods has been banned following the ruling of the EU Court of Justice, and discussions on whether alternative foods are allowed to be labeled with meat continue. The common issue of meat labeling in alternative foods is largely identified in two ways. The first is the question of whether it is reasonable to use meat labeling because alternative foods do not use meat in the traditional sense, so they are not included in the legal scope of meat, dairy products, and meat processed products. The second is whether the use of these markings on foods that do not contain any traditional meat or milk leads to misunderstanding and confusion among consumers. EU and US precedents take conflicting positions on each issue. In order to prevent large-scale disputes such as those that occurred in the United States and the EU, alternative food labeling standards that take into account the average perception of the general public in society should be prepared. In addition, even if standards that take into account the perception of the general public are prepared, measures should be sought to reduce the possibility of misunderstanding and confusion as much as possible.