법관의 법적 결정이 갖는 의미와 그 정당성 확보 문제 - 현대 법이론의 관점에서 살펴 본 판결의 정당성 논의 -
Legitimacy of Decision in the view of Modern Legal Theories
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Abstract
As we know well, the traditional legal methodology took the formalism which says that the law is a science and the legal decision could be gained through the legal syllogism. But the legal formalism has been attacked by Carl Schmidt in the Germany and the legal realism or critical legal theories in the U.S.A. The Schmidt's Dezisionismus argues that "auctoritas non veritas facit legem", that is to say, "Law is based on authority rather than truth". This legal proposition can be translated into the expression "Law is indeterminate", the legal indeterminacy thesis in the view of legal realism or critical legal theories. Dezisionismus and Legal Indeterminacy Thesis have been refuted by Robert Alexy's legal argumentation theory and Ronald Dworkin's right answer thesis which asserts law as integrity. R. Dworkin argues that law can be determinate. According to Dworkin, there are so many inconsistencies between rules, but the legal principle can resolve the inconsistencies because it has the different system from rules and is the optimal order for efficiency. Alexy argues that though it is impossible to determine the hierarchy of legal principle, but legal decision can be warranted if the decision can be justified in his legal argumentation theory. Today the "pure" Dezisionism and the "radical" Legal Indeterminacy Thesis have no effect in legal academy and now the main legal subject is moving to the justification of decision. As many legal theorists indicate, the justification of decision could be gained through the persuasive legal reasons, the social values such as justice or equity, and the procedural fairness which warrants the rational argument between the parties and the parties' voluntary and equal participation in the trial.
참고문헌 (40)
- 계희열, "결단주의적 헌법개념과 그 문제점 소고", 헌법논총, 4 (1993), 헌법재판소
- 권영준, "민사재판에 있어서 이론, 법리, 실무", 서울대학교 법학, 49(3), pp.313~354 (2008), 법학연구소
- 김영환, "법적 논증이론의 전개과정과 그 실천적 의미", 현대법철학의 흐름 (1997), 한국법철학회
- 김정오, "비판법학의 원천과 쟁점들", 현대법철학의 흐름 (1997), 한국법철학회
- 류승훈, "결단주의논증과 관련한 일 고찰. in: 지안 김지수 교수 정년기념논문집" (2003), 법률출판사
- 박은정, "자연법의 문제들" (2007), 세창출판사
- 박준석, "The Concept of Authority, in: 서울대학교 법학연구소 법학연구총서 제16권" (2007), 경인문화사
- 송희식, "법의 해석과 기호체계", 선문법학, 8(1) (2008)
- 안성조, "법적 불확정성과 법의 지배 － The law is reason unaffected by desire Laws, when good, should be supreme -", 법철학연구, 10(2), pp.61~114 (2007), 한국법철학회
- 안성조, "괴델정리의 법이론적 함의", 서울대학교 법학, 49(4), pp.683~731 (2008), 법학연구소
- 안성조, "형법의 해석과 적용에 있어서 규칙따르기(Rule-Following) 논변의 의의", 경찰법연구, 4(1) (2006)
- 오세혁, "법철학사" (2005), 세창출판사
- 이상돈, "법이론" (1997), 박영사
- 최봉철, "법현실주의", 미국학, 20 (1997)
- H.L.A. Hart, "법의 개념" (2002), 아카넷
- Robert Alexy, "법적 논증이론" (2007), 고려대학교 출판부
- 다나카 시게아키, "현대법이론" (2007), 동국대학교 출판부
- 아르투어 카우프만, "법철학" (2007), 나남
- Andrew Altman, "Legal Realism, Critical Legal Studies, and Dworkin", Philosophy and Public Affairs, 15 (1986)
- Anthony D'Amato, "Pragmatic Indeterminacy", Northwestern Law Review, 85(92) (1990)
- Anthony J. Seobok, "Finding Wittgenstein at the core of the rule of recognition", SMU Law Review (1999)
- Cass Sunstein, "Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict", ~ (1996)
- David Kairys, "Legal Reasoning", The Politics of Law, a progressive critique, ~ (1982)
- Hasso Hofmann, "Legitimität gegen Legalität, 2. Aufl" (1992)
- H.L.A. Hart, "Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals", Harvard Law Review, 71 (1958)
- Jerome Frank, "Law and the Modern Mind. in: American Legal Realism" (1993), Oxford Univ. Press
- Jes Bjarup, "Kripke's Case: Some Remarks on Rules, their Interpretation and Application", Rechtstheorie, 19 (1988)
- Jules L. Coleman, "Objectivity, and Authority, in: Law and Interpretation" (1997), Oxford Univ. Press
- Katja Langenbucher, "Zur Rolle des Richters in der anglo-amerikanischen Rechtstheorie", Rechtstheorie, 25 (1994)
- Ken Kress, "A Preface to Epistemological Indeterminacy", Northwestern Law Review, 85 (1990)
- Ken Kress, "Legal Indeterminacy", California Law Review, 77 (1989)
- K. Schmitt, "Gesetz und Urteil, 2. Aufl" (1969)
- Larry Alexander, "Against Legal Principles, in: Law and Interpretation" (1997), Oxford Univ. Press
- Owen M. Fiss, "Objectivity and Interpretation", Stanford Law Review (1982)
- Richard Posner, "The problems of jurisprudence", ~ (1996)
- Robert Alexy, "Theorie der Grundrechte", ~ (1986)
- Roberto Unger, "What should legal analysis become", ~ (1996)
- R. Dworkin, "Buergerrechte ernstgenommen", Frankfurt a.M, ~ (1984)
- Ronald Dworkin, "Law's Empire", ~ (1986)
- Scott Hershovitz, "Wittgenstein on Rules: The Phantom Menace", Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 22(4) (2002)