본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

‘집회의 자유’의 헌법적 보장- 헌법재판소 결정의 논증 비판 -

“Freedom of Assembly” in the Constitutional Court’s View - A Critical Analysis of Its Judicial Reasoning -

0

조회

0

다운로드

3

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

The Constitutional Court of Korea, in spite of its brilliant performance for two decades, especially in liberty’s blessed domain, now confronts some criticism. Freedom of assembly, thanks to the Court’s broad interpretation of the Constitution, still reigns supreme in our representative democracy. However, the Court’s reasoning cannot be justified any more. The Court holds repeatedly that the direct-democratic “function” of freedom of assembly makes it difficult to limit the freedom itself. But according to liberal constitutional theory, such active interpretation of the Constitution has no ground. The Court also holds that the prohibition of licensing regulation (Article 21 Section II of the Korean Constitution) means a kind of “absolute guarantee” excluding the proportionality review of freedom of assembly. But some deeper research into the constitutional documents reveals that such absolute interpretation of the Constitution has no ground, either. Furthermore, such extreme strengthening of freedom of assembly doesn’t match with other decisions of the Court in similar cases.

Abstract

The Constitutional Court of Korea, in spite of its brilliant performance for two decades, especially in liberty’s blessed domain, now confronts some criticism. Freedom of assembly, thanks to the Court’s broad interpretation of the Constitution, still reigns supreme in our representative democracy. However, the Court’s reasoning cannot be justified any more. The Court holds repeatedly that the direct-democratic “function” of freedom of assembly makes it difficult to limit the freedom itself. But according to liberal constitutional theory, such active interpretation of the Constitution has no ground. The Court also holds that the prohibition of licensing regulation (Article 21 Section II of the Korean Constitution) means a kind of “absolute guarantee” excluding the proportionality review of freedom of assembly. But some deeper research into the constitutional documents reveals that such absolute interpretation of the Constitution has no ground, either. Furthermore, such extreme strengthening of freedom of assembly doesn’t match with other decisions of the Court in similar cases.

참고문헌 (22)

  1. Duerig, Komm. z. GG, "Depenheuer in Maunz", pp.1~
  2. v. Mangoldt, "Gusy", pp.1~
  3. H. Schulze-Fielitz, "Grundgesetz-Kommentar, Bd. 1, 2", pp.1~ (2004)
  4. Kunig, "GGK I, 5", pp.1~
  5. Michael Kloepfer, "Versammlungsfreiheit, In HStR VII", pp.1~
  6. 국회사무처, "제35회국회 제1차 헌법개정안기초위원회(1960. 5. 4) 속기록", ~ (1960)
  7. 국회사무처, "35회국회 제33차회의(1960. 6. 10) 속기록", ~ (1960)
  8. 국회사무처, "제35회국회 제34차회의(1960. 6. 11) 속기록", ~ (1960)
  9. 국회사무처, "35회국회 제37차회의(1960. 6. 15) 속기록", ~ (1960)
  10. 국회사무처, "제130회국회 제4차 헌법개정특별위원회회의록(1986. 8. 25)", ~ (1986)
  11. 국회사무처, "제135회국회 제7차 헌법개정특별위원회회의록(1987. 8. 31)", ~ (1987)
  12. 국회사무처, "제136회국회 제7차 헌법개정특별위원회회의록(1987. 9. 17)", ~ (1987)
  13. 김철수, "입법자료교재 헌법" (1980), 박영사
  14. 대한민국국회, "헌법개정심의록 제1집", ~ (1967)
  15. 대한민국국회, "헌법개정심의록 제2집", ~ (1967)
  16. 민의원사무처, "제35회국회 제1차 민의원내각책임제개헌공청회(1960. 5. 5) 속기록(其一其二)", ~ (1960)
  17. 법제처, "각계개헌의견요약(79. 12. 6~80. 3. 10 현재)", ~ (1980)
  18. 헌법연구반 보고서, "법제처", ~ (1980)
  19. 신우철, "헌정사연구(抄)-건국헌법에서 현행헌법까지", 영남법학, 9(1), pp.12~ (2002)
  20. 이종극, "제3공화국 헌법개정 당시의 회고 잡감", 국회보, 46 (1965)
  21. 조지형, "87년 헌법의 역사화와 시대적 소명", 법과사회, (38), pp.159~184 (2010), 법과사회이론학회
  22. 한태연, "역사와 헌법시리즈 제1회 한국헌법과 헌법학의 회고", 헌법학연구, 8(1), pp.9~52 (2002), 한국헌법학회

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (10건)