규제국가의 전개와 공법학의 과제 - 과학기술혁신에 따른 공법적 대응을 중심으로 -

Abstract

The Fourth Industrial Revolution is expected to change people’s lifestyle, market, occupation and work style, and even the role of government. Major countries in the world including Korea are making various efforts to hold a leading position in the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Korea also established technological infrastructure in the Fourth Industrial Revolution by launching the world’s first 5G service, and is establishing and implementing various promotion policies for the technology innovation in the field of artificial intelligence. Social, economic and cultural changes require a new paradigm in the regulatory system. Since the basic framework and content of the regulatory paradigm are formed by public law rules and institutions, a detailed study on public law solution is needed to respond to the technological innovation era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. In the midst of the rapid change of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which we have never experienced, the following new regulatory paradigm is required to address the conflict between technological innovation and regulation. First, the principle of materiellen Rechtsstaat(the rule of law) must be implemented by overcoming formality of the rule of law. It should be possible to operate flexible regulations to take into account the development of science and technology. Second, the principles of negative regulation, ex-post regulation and comprehensive regulation from paragraph 5-2 of the korean Framework Act On Administrative Regulations, which apply to the regulation of new services or products using emerging technology, should be a primary consideration when enacting administrative regulations. Third, a risk-based regulation which differentiates regulations according to the degree of risk should be adopted. Fourth, legal and financial support is needed to help small and medium-sized enterprises with creative ideas respond to their legal risks. Fifth, incentives should be aligned to induce active performance of public officials in charge for the practical effect of the four Regulatory Innovation Acts. In addition, it is required to enact a general law on regulatory innovation targeting whole industry without separating into specific industrial sectors. Finally, as technology rapidly evolves and expertise in each area increases, the need for self-regulation is increasing with a gap in the existing traditional approach of regulation. With various regulators that create and implement regulations the way of regulation must also be diversified.