입헌주의 맹아기 제 헌법문서의 사법조항 분석 - 개화기 원시 헌법문서와 임시정부 헌법 준비문서를 중심으로 -
The Judiciary Provisions of the Constitutional Documents in the Pre - Constitutional Period : Some Primitive Constitutions in the Late 19th Century and Some Provisional Constitutions in the Colonial Period
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The first “official” Korean Constitution, which was made in June and July 1948, by some groups of congressmen guided by Chin-O Yu, can be characterized as having been founded upon a deep distrust in the judiciary. First, it adopted a 10-year term appointment of judges, instead of a life appointment. Second, it benchmarked a European-type constitutional court system, instead of an American-type judicial review system. I, as a constitutional historian, consider such “anti-judiciary” tendencies as being deeply rooted in our constitutional experiences during the enlightenment period and the colonial period. We cannot find any meaningful effort to build a modern independent judicial system in such “primitive” constitutional documents as Jeongryeong(government order) of 1884, Hongbeom(great norm) of 1895, Heonui(petition to emperor) of 1898 and Gukje(imperial constitution) of 1899. Such “provisional” constitutional documents as Imsiheonjang(provisional charter) of 1919 and Geongukgangryeong(principles and plans for national reconstruction) of 1941, drafted by So-ang Jo, do not even contain any judiciary clause. In Imsiheonbeop(provisional constitution) of 1925 and Imsiyakheon(provisional draft constitution) of 1927/1940, the judiciary was simply stated in principle. Imsiheonbeop(provisional constitution) of 1919 and Imsiheonjang(provisional charter) of 1944 provided a separated chapter for the judiciary, under the circumstance of independence movement, however, more attention was paid to the provisional congress and even the limited provisions for the judiciary could not take effect.
Abstract
The first “official” Korean Constitution, which was made in June and July 1948, by some groups of congressmen guided by Chin-O Yu, can be characterized as having been founded upon a deep distrust in the judiciary. First, it adopted a 10-year term appointment of judges, instead of a life appointment. Second, it benchmarked a European-type constitutional court system, instead of an American-type judicial review system. I, as a constitutional historian, consider such “anti-judiciary” tendencies as being deeply rooted in our constitutional experiences during the enlightenment period and the colonial period. We cannot find any meaningful effort to build a modern independent judicial system in such “primitive” constitutional documents as Jeongryeong(government order) of 1884, Hongbeom(great norm) of 1895, Heonui(petition to emperor) of 1898 and Gukje(imperial constitution) of 1899. Such “provisional” constitutional documents as Imsiheonjang(provisional charter) of 1919 and Geongukgangryeong(principles and plans for national reconstruction) of 1941, drafted by So-ang Jo, do not even contain any judiciary clause. In Imsiheonbeop(provisional constitution) of 1925 and Imsiyakheon(provisional draft constitution) of 1927/1940, the judiciary was simply stated in principle. Imsiheonbeop(provisional constitution) of 1919 and Imsiheonjang(provisional charter) of 1944 provided a separated chapter for the judiciary, under the circumstance of independence movement, however, more attention was paid to the provisional congress and even the limited provisions for the judiciary could not take effect.
참고문헌 (28)
- 국사편찬위원회, "대한민국임시정부자료집 3 : 임시의정원II" (2005), 국사편찬위원회
- 국사편찬위원회, "대한민국임시정부자료집 4 : 임시의정원III" (2005), 국사편찬위원회
- 국회도서관, "대한민국임시정부의정원문서", 국회도서관, ~ (1974)
- 김갑천, "박영효의 건백서", 한국정치연구, 2 (1990)
- 독립운동사편찬위원회, "독립운동사 : 제4권 임시정부사" (1972), 독립유공자사업기금운용위원회
- 博聞局, "萬國政表(一)" (1886), 博聞局
- 박영석, "석주 이상룡 연구—임정 국무령선임배경을 중심으로—", 역사학보, 89 (1981)
- 박은숙, "갑신정변 연구 : 조선의 근대적 개혁구상과 민중의 인식" (2005), 역사비평사
- 朴定陽, "朴定陽全集(竹泉稿)" (1984), 아세아문화사
- 손세일, "3‧1운동 50주년 기념논집" (1989), 동아일보사
- 신우철, "건국강령(1941. 10. 28) 연구‘조소앙 헌법사상’의 헌법사적 의미를 되새기며", 중앙법학, 10(1), pp.63~98 (2008), 중앙법학회
- 신우철, "근대 사법제도 성립사 비교연구 : 우리 '법원조직' 법제의 초기 형성", 법조, 56(9), pp.82~131 (2007), 법조협회
- 신우철, "근대 사법제도 성립사 비교연구 -한국에 있어서 ‘사법독립’ 원리의 태동 수용과 전개-", 서울대학교 법학, 49(2), pp.256~285 (2008), 법학연구소
- 신우철, "근대 입헌주의 수용의 비교헌법사-개화기 ‘원시 헌법문서’분석을 중심으로-", 법과사회, (33), pp.137~171 (2007), 법과사회이론학회
- 신우철, "임시약헌(1927. 3. 5) 연구: 제정 경위, 구조와 내용, 위원제 정부형태", 법사학연구, (31), pp.241~285 (2005), 한국법사학회
- 신우철, "임시약헌(1940.10.9) 연구-가려진 ‘정치적 의도’의 발굴-", 법사학연구, (37), pp.129~171 (2008), 한국법사학회
- 신우철, "임시헌장(1944.4.22) 연구 -독립운동, 권력투쟁 그리고 '헌법'", 법과사회, (34), pp.323~372 (2008), 법과사회이론학회
- 신우철, "중국의 제헌운동이 상해 임시정부 헌법개정에 미친 영향-1920년대의 헌법개정 과정에 나타난 정치제도의 규범과 현실-", 법과사회, (27), pp.281~303 (2004), 법과사회이론학회
- 신우철, "중국의 제헌운동이 상해 임시정부 헌법제정에 미친 영향:", 법사학연구, (29), pp.5~55 (2004), 한국법사학회
- 신우철, "헌법본질론 소묘—‘타협의 결과물’로서의 헌법", 영남법학, 10(2) (2004)
- 전봉덕, "대한국국제의 제정과 기본사상", 법사학연구, 1 (1974)
- 조경한, "백강회고록(국외편)" (1985), 한국종교협의회
- 崔漢綺, "地毬典要" (1971), 경인문화사
- 한국정신문화연구원, "한국독립운동사자료집 : 조소앙편(2)" (1996), 한국정신문화연구원
- 吳宗慈, "中華民國憲法史(前篇)" (1973), 臺聯國風出版社
- 外務省, "日本外交文書 27-1", 日本國際連合協會, ~ (1953)
- 魏源, "海國圖志(卷59, 1852)", ~ (1852)
- 伊藤博文, "秘書類纂 朝鮮交涉資料(下卷)" (1970), 原書房
