본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

법학전문대학원 설치인가관련 판결의 행정법적 검토 (제척사유의 해석 및 위임입법권과 재량권의 한계, 사정판결의 판단기준) - 대법원 2009.12.10선고 2009두8359판결 및 2009.12.10.선고 2009두14606 판결을 중심으로1)

A Study on the Supreme Court's Decisions related to Permission of Law School(Application of Expulsive Cause in Competitors' Litigation, Decisional Criteria of Public Welfare in the Judicial Decision after Due Consideration of Circumstances(Sajeungpangeyul) and Standing)

0

조회

0

다운로드

2

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

I explore on the problem of standing, interpretation of expulsive cause in the competitors' litigation and decisional criteria of public welfare in judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances(sajeungpangeyul)in this article. I evaluated the Supreme Court's two decisions of permitrefusal of law school. In theses cases the Supreme Court has interpreted and applied art.13 and art.10 of Law school Act of expulsive cause very formally. The Supreme Court held that defendant's administrative disposition(action) is not invalid but revocable. I think that the defendant's action is capable of invalidity because of unconstitutionality (disposition based on unconstitutional legislation of art. 5 of law school act's enforcement ordinance) and illegality by misapplication of above-mentioned Act. It has to be corrected in another cases in the near future. Our Administrative Litigation Act has provided on judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances at Article 28. The notion of ‘public welfare’ which is the requirement of judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances is uncertain, abstract, vague and comprehensive. So the judiciary hasn't defined it directly but has explained it indirectly in lots of separate cases. Therefore the judiciary is possible to interpret and apply it arbitrarily to a case. It is needed to establish reasonable and concrete criteria to apply public welfare to a case. In these cases I think judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances is inevitable for stable establishment of new law school system in these cases. But I guess we have been discovered some adverse effects of the system of judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances. Finally We have discovered some adverse effects of the system of judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances(sajeungpangeyul). For that reason it has to be gradually disappeared by utilizing alternatives as like temporary litigation system and preventing each case from accumulation of facts over the illegal administrative actions. In conclusion, according to above-mentioned reasons I think the Supreme Court's two law school-related decisions are not proper. So it should be corrected later in other similar cases.

Abstract

I explore on the problem of standing, interpretation of expulsive cause in the competitors' litigation and decisional criteria of public welfare in judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances(sajeungpangeyul)in this article. I evaluated the Supreme Court's two decisions of permitrefusal of law school. In theses cases the Supreme Court has interpreted and applied art.13 and art.10 of Law school Act of expulsive cause very formally. The Supreme Court held that defendant's administrative disposition(action) is not invalid but revocable. I think that the defendant's action is capable of invalidity because of unconstitutionality (disposition based on unconstitutional legislation of art. 5 of law school act's enforcement ordinance) and illegality by misapplication of above-mentioned Act. It has to be corrected in another cases in the near future. Our Administrative Litigation Act has provided on judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances at Article 28. The notion of ‘public welfare’ which is the requirement of judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances is uncertain, abstract, vague and comprehensive. So the judiciary hasn't defined it directly but has explained it indirectly in lots of separate cases. Therefore the judiciary is possible to interpret and apply it arbitrarily to a case. It is needed to establish reasonable and concrete criteria to apply public welfare to a case. In these cases I think judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances is inevitable for stable establishment of new law school system in these cases. But I guess we have been discovered some adverse effects of the system of judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances. Finally We have discovered some adverse effects of the system of judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances(sajeungpangeyul). For that reason it has to be gradually disappeared by utilizing alternatives as like temporary litigation system and preventing each case from accumulation of facts over the illegal administrative actions. In conclusion, according to above-mentioned reasons I think the Supreme Court's two law school-related decisions are not proper. So it should be corrected later in other similar cases.

참고문헌 (26)

  1. 김도창, "일반행정법론(상)" (1993), 청운사
  2. 김동희, "행정법 I" (2010), 박영사
  3. 김철수, "헌법학개론" (1989), 박영사
  4. 김철수, "헌법학신론" (2009), 박영사
  5. 김철용, "행정법I" (2009), 박영사
  6. 성낙인, "헌법학" (2009), 법문사
  7. 양건, "헌법강의" (2009), 법문사
  8. 정종섭, "헌법학원론" (2010), 박영사
  9. 정하중, "행정법개론" (2010), 법문사
  10. 최송화, "공익론-공법적 탐구-" (2002), 서울대학교출판부
  11. 홍성방, "헌법학(하)" (2010), 박영사
  12. 홍정선, "행정법원론(상)" (2009), 박영사
  13. 사법연수원, "행정구제법" (2008)
  14. 南 博方, "條解 行政事件訴訟法" (2009), 弘文堂
  15. 磯部 力, "行政法の新構想 III 行政救濟法" (2008), 有斐閣
  16. 阿部泰隆, "行政救濟の實效性" (1985), 弘文堂
  17. 권오석, "신뢰보호원칙위반과 사정판결(대전지방법원 2003.8.20.선고 2002구합283 등 판결에서 출발하여)", 실무연구자료, 5 (2003), 대전지방법원
  18. 김만오, "주택개량재개발조합설립 및 재개발사업인가처분의 하자와 사정판결, 대법원 1995.7.28. 95누4629판결", 대법원판례 해설, (24) (1995), 법원도서관
  19. 김석수, "사정판결 - 대법원판례를 중심으로 -", 사법논집, 5
  20. 김창조, "사정판결", 법학논고, 11 (1995), 경북대
  21. 김치환, "경원관계에 있어서의 제척제도 - 대상판결 : 대법원 2009.12.10.선고 2009두8359 판결(예비인가취소), 법률신문 2010년 6월 7일, 13면", ~ (2010)
  22. 송유영, "사정판결과 그 요건, 판례월보 제320호", ~
  23. 李基喆, "公共福利 내지 公益의 槪念", 토지공법연구, 18, pp.7~190 (2003), 한국토지공법학회
  24. 이은기, "경원자관계에서의 제척사유해석, 재량권판단과 위임입법 한계 - 대법원 2009. 12.10. 선고 2009두14606판결 -, 법률신문 2010년 5월 10일", ~ (2009)
  25. 이은기, "환경단체의 원고적격 부여문제", 서강법학연구, 11(1), pp.433~462 (2009), 법학연구소
  26. 홍광식, "항고소송의 판결, 행정소송에 관한 제문제(상)", 재판자료, 67 (1995), 법원행정처

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (12건)