2012년 행정소송법 개정안에 대한 평가와 전망* 51) －개정방향과 주요 쟁점을 중심으로－
A Study on the draft of administrative litigation act
0
조회
0
다운로드
9
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
If the principle of rule of law means to protect the rights of the people and implies that state power is subject to the law, the system of administrative litigation is the foundation of the state of rule of law. The Department of Justice recently prepared a draft plan of the Administrative Litigation Act and hearings were held. The framework of the revision has been carried out since 2004 by the Supreme Court. It is the goal of consistent revision work to extent people’s rights and supply more remedies. The Administrative Litigation Act of 1984 is now out-dated cloth for us, because of globallizaltion of the Republic of Korea in the 2000s and high conciousness of the people to right. The main goal should be to raise the right to fair and effective remedy and it correspond to the diverse and international affairs as well as changes of the 21st century. The main contents of the amendment are as follows: A new remedial procedures of direct obligations for the administrative office against the illegal refuse of disposal or omissions. ‘The interests due to statue’ of the current regulations regarding standing changes to ‘legal interests’. It means to expand the possibility to access remedy for the people. Suspension of execution requirements become simple and ease, and the preliminary injunction in the administrative litigation is established. The possibility to transfer lawsuit between the Civil Court and the Administrative Court is made. Finally the scope of administrative litigation becomes broad.
Abstract
If the principle of rule of law means to protect the rights of the people and implies that state power is subject to the law, the system of administrative litigation is the foundation of the state of rule of law. The Department of Justice recently prepared a draft plan of the Administrative Litigation Act and hearings were held. The framework of the revision has been carried out since 2004 by the Supreme Court. It is the goal of consistent revision work to extent people’s rights and supply more remedies. The Administrative Litigation Act of 1984 is now out-dated cloth for us, because of globallizaltion of the Republic of Korea in the 2000s and high conciousness of the people to right. The main goal should be to raise the right to fair and effective remedy and it correspond to the diverse and international affairs as well as changes of the 21st century. The main contents of the amendment are as follows: A new remedial procedures of direct obligations for the administrative office against the illegal refuse of disposal or omissions. ‘The interests due to statue’ of the current regulations regarding standing changes to ‘legal interests’. It means to expand the possibility to access remedy for the people. Suspension of execution requirements become simple and ease, and the preliminary injunction in the administrative litigation is established. The possibility to transfer lawsuit between the Civil Court and the Administrative Court is made. Finally the scope of administrative litigation becomes broad.
참고문헌 (30)
- 김연태, "행정법 Ⅰ(제10판)" (2006), 법문사
- 김성수, "일반행정법" (2010), 홍문사
- 이동훈, "헌법학개론" (2005), 도서출판 예응
- 김철용, "행정법" (2012), 고시계사
- 박이문, "철학이란 무엇인가" (2008), 지와사랑
- 백낙청, "2013년 체제 만들기" (2012), 창작과 비평사
- 유지태, "행정법신론" (2009), 박영사
- 이시윤, "신민사집행법, 제5판", 박영사
- Jürgen Habermas, "현대성의 철학적 담론" (1994), 문예출판사
- Jürgen Habermas, "사실성과 타당성" (2010), 나남
- Robert Dahl, "민주주의와 그 비판자들" (2008), 문학과 지성사
- 김병기, "행정개혁법제의 쟁점과 전망 - 행정쟁송제도의 개혁을 중심으로 -", 법제연구, (34), pp.147~186 (2008), 한국법제연구원
- 김병기, "행정소송상 집행정지의 요건으로서의 회복하기 어려운 손해와 그 주장ㆍ소명책임", 공법연구, 28(4) (2000)
- 김연태, "의무이행소송과 예방적 금지소송의 쟁점 검토 - 법무부 행정소송법 개정시안을 중심으로 -", 고려법학, (49), pp.289~324 (2007), 법학연구원
- 김중권, "권리구제확대를 위한 획기적인 전환의 마련", 행정소송법 개정 공청회 자료집 (2012), 법무부
- 송기춘, "참여정부에서의 법치주의의 발전: 헌법적 평가와 전망", 공법연구, 35(4), pp.297~335 (2007), 한국공법학회
- 김현준, "예방적 금지를 구하는 행정소송", 토지공법연구, 50, pp.295~320 (2010), 한국토지공법학회
- 박정훈, "인류의 보편적 지혜로서의 행정소송, In 행정소송의 구조와 기능" (2006), 박영사
- 박정훈, "취소소송의 원고적격(1)－독일법의 비판적 검토, In 행정소송의 구조와 기능" (2006), 박영사
- 박정훈, "원고적격ㆍ의무이행소송ㆍ화해권고결정", 행정소송법 개정 공청회 자료집 (2012)
- 백윤기, "행정소송법 개정에 관한 소고― 대법원과 법무부 개정안의 호비교를 중심으로 ―", 행정법연구, 18, pp.411~431 (2007), 행정법이론실무학회(行政法理論實務學會)
- 서태환, "行政訴訟에서 있어서의 執行停止要件", 사법연수원 논문집, 5 (2008), 사법연수원
- 이계수, "정부정책을 다투는 행정소송에서 법원의 역할 -‘제주지방법원 2010. 12. 15. 선고, 2010구합34 등 판결’에 대한 비평을 중심으로-", 일감법학, (23), pp.323~362 (2012), 법학연구소
- 이희정, "가처분제도ㆍ당사자소송 활성화ㆍ제소기간 연장 등", 법무부 행정소송법 개정 공청회 자료집 (2007)
- 임지봉, "美國憲法上 司法權 行使의 限界로서의 原告適格", 미국헌법연구, 22(1), pp.295~324 (2011), 미국헌법학회
- 임혁백, "시장ㆍ국가ㆍ민주주의" (2007), 나남
- 정하중, "法務部의 行政訴訟法改正案에 대한 立法論的 考察", 지방자치법연구, 7(3), pp.397~421 (2007), 한국지방자치법학회
- 정호경, "기본법의 관점에서 본 독일 행정소송제도의 기능 ― 특히 법치국가원리의 관점에서 ―", 공법연구, 39(2), pp.571~595 (2010), 한국공법학회
- 조홍식, "原告適格의 政治經濟學( II ) : 대법원의 行政訴訟法 改正案에 나타난 客觀訴訟觀을 글감으로 하여", 憲法實務硏究, 6 (2005), 헌법실무연구회
- "안철수 현상이 남긴 것", 최장집[URL]