행정소송상 집행정지의 대상적격
A Object of Execution Suspension in Administrative Litigation Act
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
1. Korean Administrative Litigation Act subsection (1) of Article 23(Suspension of Execution) regulates "The institution of a revocation litigation shall not preclude the effect, execution or the continuation of a procedure of disposition, etc.". Therefore an Execution is not suspended, although a disposition, etc. is indeed illegal. It is disadvantageous to other party of a disposition, etc. 2. To overcome this unreasonableness, korean Administrative Litigation Act Article 23 (2) rules "In case where a revocation litigation is instituted, if it is deemed urgently necessary to prevent irreparable damage from being caused by a disposition, etc. or execution or the continuation of procedure thereof, the court, in which the merits are pending, upon a request from the party or ex officio, may decide to suspend wholly or partly the effect, execution or the continuation of procedure of the disposition, etc. (hereinafter referred to as the "suspension of execution"): if the objective of a suspension of the effect of a disposition may be attained by suspending the execution or the continuation of procedure of the disposition etc., it shall not be permitted." So "suspension of execution" is exceptionally recognized. 3. In this essay, objects of "execution suspension" in Administrative Litigation are researching. Especially negative disposition, powerless action, later disposition and double effect disposition(additional clauses disposition and effect on the third party disposition). 4. I suggest, that our Administrative Litigation Act will become a fundamental rule of "suspension of execution". Therefore in almost Administrative Litigation, "The institution of a revocation litigation shall preclude the effect, execution or the continuation of a procedure of disposition, etc.". It is a way to the protection of a citizen right.
Abstract
1. Korean Administrative Litigation Act subsection (1) of Article 23(Suspension of Execution) regulates "The institution of a revocation litigation shall not preclude the effect, execution or the continuation of a procedure of disposition, etc.". Therefore an Execution is not suspended, although a disposition, etc. is indeed illegal. It is disadvantageous to other party of a disposition, etc. 2. To overcome this unreasonableness, korean Administrative Litigation Act Article 23 (2) rules "In case where a revocation litigation is instituted, if it is deemed urgently necessary to prevent irreparable damage from being caused by a disposition, etc. or execution or the continuation of procedure thereof, the court, in which the merits are pending, upon a request from the party or ex officio, may decide to suspend wholly or partly the effect, execution or the continuation of procedure of the disposition, etc. (hereinafter referred to as the "suspension of execution"): if the objective of a suspension of the effect of a disposition may be attained by suspending the execution or the continuation of procedure of the disposition etc., it shall not be permitted." So "suspension of execution" is exceptionally recognized. 3. In this essay, objects of "execution suspension" in Administrative Litigation are researching. Especially negative disposition, powerless action, later disposition and double effect disposition(additional clauses disposition and effect on the third party disposition). 4. I suggest, that our Administrative Litigation Act will become a fundamental rule of "suspension of execution". Therefore in almost Administrative Litigation, "The institution of a revocation litigation shall preclude the effect, execution or the continuation of a procedure of disposition, etc.". It is a way to the protection of a citizen right.
참고문헌 (18)
- 김철용, "주석 행정소송법" (2004), 박영사
- 이희정, "판례교재 행정법" (2009), 법문사
- 김남진, "행정법 I 제14판" (2010)
- 김동희, "행정법 I 제14판" (2008), 박영사
- 김철용, "행정법 I 제13판" (2010), 박영사
- 박종수, "행정법신론 제15판" (2011), 박영사
- 박균성, "행정법론강의 제7판" (2010), 박영사
- 정하중, "행정법총론 제5판" (2011), 법문사
- 홍정선, "행정법원론(상) 제19판" (2011), 박영사
- 고영훈, "독일 행정법원법상의 가구제제도", 법제연구, (7), pp.167~192 (1994), 한국법제연구원
- 김철용, "행정소송법상의 집행정지", pp.41~52 (1993), 고시계
- 서태환, "행정소송에서 있어서의 집행정지요건", 사법연수원 논문집, 5, pp.409~443 (2008), 사법연수원
- 설계경, "행정소송상 집행정지", 고시계, 50(10)통권 : 584 (2005), 국가고시학회
- 이상규, "행정소송에 있어서의 가구제,” 「현대공법학의 제문제;우당윤세창박사정년 기념」", pp.146~163 (1983), 박영사
- 이영복, "위법한 부관에 대한 행정쟁송", 대법원판례해설, (4), pp.199~208 (1988), 법원도서관
- 한견우, "프랑스 행정소송상 집행정지제도-집행정지의 요건을 중심으로", 법조, 통권 : 389, pp.102~126 (1989), 법조협회
- 정태웅, "행정처분의 집행정지", 사법논집, 8, pp.543~574 (1977), 법원도서관
- 조해현, , pp.621~632 (2008), 한국사법행정학회
