과태료의 부과 및 징수 절차에 대한 개선방안 - 특히「질서위반행위규제법」의 문제점을 중심으로 -

Abstract

The procedures for imposition and collection of fines are too focused on criminal procedure, and administrative act is not recognized for the imposition of fines in Korea. In Japan, however, the nature of administrative act is recognized for fines imposed by the heads of local governments. In German legislation, which had a great influence on the enactment of the Act on the Regulation of Violation of Public Order, the decision to impose a fine is regarded as an administrative act. In some cases, as in Austrian legislation, administrative order punishment is governed by the General Administrative Procedure Act. Since fines are sanctions for minor violations of the law and order, participation of the prosecutors in the fines trial can put a psychological burden on the public. When dissatisfied with the decision of the fine, it is necessary to actively consider ways to request an administrative tribunal or file an administrative lawsuit. In addition, the Act on the Regulation of Violations of Public Order should provide provisions for procedures that allow public officials who crack down on violations of public order to promptly execute identification or data investigations. In these procedures, the principle of proportionality should be observed, and care should be taken not to infringe on basic rights or human rights. The execution of the fine for negligence trial is generally carried out in accordance with the Civil Execution Act or by compulsory collection procedure of national or local taxes. However, it is not clear what procedure should be followed, and the effectiveness of compulsory collection is deteriorating when fines are not paid. When following the procedure for compulsory collection of national or local taxes, it is desirable to recognize the nature of administrative act for the decision to impose fines for negligence. Furthermore, in order to increase the collection rate of fines, it is necessary to introduce a regulation on the seize, the public announcement of the list of high-income and frequent arrears. In Swiss legislation, seized goods or property of value are considered confiscated to pay administrative fines. It is also worth referring to these legislative examples to ensure the effectiveness of the collection process.