국제법학과 국제관계학의 학제 간 연구에 관한 고찰

임예준 경상국립대학교 법학연구소 2021 법학연구 Vol.29 No.2

International law is an academic discipline that studies the legal order of the international community and is concerned with the process of formation of institutions and norms. International relations is an academic discipline that studies the interactions and processes of various actors in the international community focused on explanation and predictions. Although international law and international relationships essentially share the intellectual exploration of international dynamics and order, they have developed into separate academic divisions, and have formed ‘two cultures’ due to differences in terminology as well as agenda and methodologies. * Assistant Professor, College of Public Policy, Korea University This article examines the development of interdisciplinary research in international law and international relations, as well as the interdisciplinary research field, and theoretically considers the interdisciplinary contacts and the possibility of interdisciplinary research. To this end, it examines the development process of interdisciplinary research in international law and international relations and finds elective affinity with international law by reviewing major theories of international relations. This article specifically introduces Anne-Marie Slaughter's liberal theory of international law to gauge the new methodologies in international law. From the perspective of international law, the theory of international relations allows us to consider the political factors involved in forming laws and better understand the meaning of norms and systems by contextualizing them. Thus, interdisciplinary research in international law and international relations would help effectively apprehend legal norms and institutions, overcoming the limitations of the international law approach that assumed or presupposed an idealistic normative system. It also allows us to deviate from a norm-centric approach and an alternative to the excessive ideologically vaporized international law. 국제법학은 국가 간의 관계를 규율하는 법을 포함하여 오늘날에는 국제공동체 전체의 관계와 질서 그리고 관련 제도와 규범의 형성과정을 주로 연구하는 학문 분야를 일컫는다. 국제관계학은 국가 간의 정치와 정치형태, 그리고 국제사회에서의 다양한 행위자의 상호작용과 과정을 연구하는 학문 분야를 일컫는다. 국제법학과 국제관계학은 기본적으로 국제사회의 역학관계 및 질서라는 지적 탐구 영역을 공유하고 있다. 그렇지만 국제법학과 국제관계학은 별개의 학문 분과로 발전했으며, 의제와 방법론뿐만 아니라, 용어 사용의 차이로 인하여 ‘두 개의 문화’를 형성해 왔다. 이 글은 국제법학과 국제관계학의 학제 간 연구의 발전과정과 학제적 연구영역을 살펴보고, 두 학문의 접점과 학제 간 연구의 확장 가능성을 고찰함을 목적으로 한다. 이를 위하여 국제관계이론을 개괄적으로 검토함으로써 국제법과의 선택적 친화성을 검토하였다. 다음으로 국제법학과 국제관계학의 학제 간 연구의 발전과정을 살펴보고, 활성화 요인과 학제 간 연구의 의의를 분석하였다. 마지막으로 학제 간 연구방법과 주요 연구영역을 살펴보고, 자유주의 이론을 국제법학에 연계하는 방법론을 취하고 있는 Anne-Marie Slaughter의 주요 이론을 통해 학제 간 연구의 방향을 가늠해보았다. 국제법의 관점에서 국제관계이론은 법제도를 설명하는데에 있어 법 형성에 관여하는 정치적 요소를 고려할 수 있게 하며, 규범과 제도의 의미를 규범과 제도가 위치한 맥락을 통해 더욱 잘 이해할 수 있게 해준다는 의의가 있다. 따라서 국제법학에 있어 국제관계학과의 학제 간 연구는 법규범과 제도를 정치적 맥락에서 설명함으로써, 이상주의적 규범 체제를 상정한 국제법학의 한계를 극복하여, 법규범과 제도를 효과적으로 이해하는 데 도움을 준다. 또한, 단순히 규범 중심적인 접근에서 벗어날 수 있게 하며, 국제법이 지나치게 이데올로기화되는 것에 대한 대안이 되기도 한다.

공공기관의 입찰참가자격 제한행위 개선방안 연구

양희현,지성욱 경상국립대학교 법학연구소 2025 법학연구 Vol.33 No.1

본 논문은 공공기관의 입찰참가자격 제한행위가 재량행위이어야 하는지 기속행위이어야 하는지를 검토하였다. 이러한 사항은 공공기관이 법령의 위임과 준용이라는 복잡한 입찰참가자격 제한체계에 놓여 있기 때문에 발생하는 것이다. 지금까지 입찰참가자격 제한제도나 재량행위 및 기속행위에 대한 개별적인 연구는 많이 진행되었다. 그러나 공공기관이 입찰참가자격을 제한할 경우 재량행위로 볼 것인지, 기속행위로 볼 것인지에 대해 공공기관의 구체적인 사례나 국회의 입법 시도를 근거로 검토한 연구는 찾아보기 어려웠다. 공공기관에서 입찰참가자격 제한행위의 근간이 되는 「공공기관의 운영에 관한 법률」(이하 '공운법') 제39조 제3항에서, 이와 관련한 사항을 「공기업․준정부기관 계약사무규칙」(이하 '계약사무규칙')에 위임하고 있다. 계약사무규칙 제15조는 「국가를 당사자로 하는 계약에 관한 법률」(이하 '국가계약법') 제27조에 따라 입찰참가자격을 제한하도록 되어 있다. 그런데 공운법과 계약사무규칙에는 부정당업자에 대해 "입찰참가자격을 제한할 수 있다"고 되어 있는 반면, 국가계약법에는 "입찰 참가자격을 제한하여야" 한다고 되어 있다. 즉, 계약질서 위반행위라는 동일한 행위를 두고, 공운법과 계약사무규칙은 재량행위로, 국가계약법은 기속행위로 규정되어 있다. 그렇다면, 공공기관은 부정당업자에 대해 입찰참가자격을 제한할 경우 재량행위로 할지, 기속행위로 할지에 대해 혼선이 발생할 수 있다. 국가철도공단(이하 '공단')에서 2024년에 개최된 계약심의위원회에서 기업은 공단에게 입찰참가자격 제한행위의 재량권 행사를 요청하였다. 또한, 공단은 공공기관의 입찰참가자격 제한행위가 재량행위인지 기속행위인지 확인하기 위해 2곳의 법무법인에 법률자문을 의뢰했던 사례가 있다. 2곳의 법무법인은 공통적으로 공공기관의 입찰참가자격 제한행위는 기속행위가 적정하다고 회신하였다. 그런데 이와 반대되는 의견도 존재한다. 즉, 공공기관의 입찰참가자격 제한행위에 대해서 전문가의 의견이 일치하지 않고 있다. 21대 국회와 22대 국회는 공운법을 개정하기 위한 입법을 세 차례 시도하였다. 이는 공운법의 입찰참가자격 제한행위를 재량행위에서 기속행위로 변경하는 것이었다. 21대 국회에서 제출된 공운법 개정안은 임기만료로 폐기되었다. 그리고 22대 국회에서 제출된 공운법 개정안은 현재 국회 기획재정위원회에 상정된 상태이다. 본 논문은 다음과 같은 3가지 점에서 공공기관의 입찰참가자격 제한행위를 기속행위로 변경하는 것이 합리적이라고 판단하였다. 첫째, 입찰참가자격 제한행위와 관련하여, 중앙부처와 지자체는 기속행위로 규정되어 있고, 공공기관은 재량행위로 규정되어 있다. 따라서 공공입찰을 시행하는 발주청의 형평성을 확보하는 것이 필요하다. 둘째, 재량행위를 기속행위로 전환시키거나 재량권의 범위를 축소하여 행정의 예측 가능성을 제고하는 것이 법치주의에 부합한다. 셋째, 공공기관에게 재량권이 부여되더라도 현실적으로 공공기관은 감사 수감, 언론 보도 등을 감안하여 재량권을 활용하지 않을 확률이 높다. 이에 따라 본 논문은 공운법과 계약사무규칙의 입찰참가자격 제한행위를 기속행위로 개정하되, 공정성과 투명성을 확보할 수 있도록 계약심의위원회 설치에 관한 조항을 신설하는 것이 타당하다고 검토하 ... This paper examines whether the restriction of bidding eligibility by public institutions should be a discretionary act or a mandatory act. This issue arises because public institutions are subject to a complex system of bidding eligibility restrictions delegated and applied by law. While there have been many individual studies on the bidding eligibility restriction system, discretionary acts, and mandatory acts, it is difficult to find research that examines whether public institutions' restrictions on bidding eligibility should be viewed as discretionary or mandatory acts, based on specific cases of public institutions or legislative attempts by the National Assembly. Article 39, Paragraph 3 of the Act on the Management of Public Institutions (hereinafter referred to as the "Public Institutions Act"), which forms the basis for the restriction of bidding eligibility by public institutions, delegates related matters to the Rules on Contract Affairs of Public Enterprises and Quasi-Governmental Institutions (hereinafter referred to as the "Contract Affairs Rules"). Article 15 of the Contract Affairs Rules stipulates that bidding eligibility should be restricted in accordance with Article 27 of the Act on Contracts to Which the State is a Party (hereinafter referred to as the "State Contracts Act"). However, while the Public Institutions Act and the Contract Affairs Rules state that bidding eligibility "may be restricted" for fraudulent contractors, the State Contracts Act states that bidding eligibility "shall be restricted." In other words, for the same act of violating contract order, the Public Institutions Act and the Contract Affairs Rules define it as a discretionary act, while the State Contracts Act defines it as a mandatory act. Therefore, public institutions may be confused about whether to treat the restriction of bidding eligibility as a discretionary or mandatory act. In 2024, at the Contract Review Committee held by the Korea National Railway (hereinafter referred to as the "KR"), there was a case where a company requested the KR to exercise its discretion in restricting bidding eligibility. Additionally, the KR sought legal advice from two law firms to confirm whether the restriction of bidding eligibility by public institutions is a discretionary or mandatory act. Both law firms responded that it is appropriate for the restriction of bidding eligibility by public institutions to be a mandatory act. However, there are also opposing opinions. In other words, experts do not agree on whether the restriction of bidding eligibility by public institutions should be a discretionary or mandatory act. The 21st and 22nd National Assemblies attempted to amend the Public Institutions Act three times to change the restriction of bidding eligibility from a discretionary act to a mandatory act. The amendment bill submitted by the 21st National Assembly was discarded due to the expiration of its term. The amendment bill submitted by the 22nd National Assembly is currently pending in the Planning and Finance Committee of the National Assembly. This paper concludes that it is reasonable to change the restriction of bidding eligibility by public institutions to a mandatory act for the following three reasons. First, regarding the restriction of bidding eligibility, central ministries and local governments are regulated as mandatory acts, while public institutions are regulated as discretionary acts. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure fairness among the contracting authorities implementing public bids. Second, converting discretionary acts to mandatory acts or reducing the scope of discretion enhances the predictability of administration, which is in line with the rule of law. Third, even if public institutions are granted discretion, they are unlikely to exercise it in practice, considering internal and external audits and the media. Accordingly, this paper suggests that it is appropriate to amend the Public Institutions A...

비재무 관련 정보 공시제도의 개선방안에 관한 연구

이형기 경상국립대학교 법학연구소 2021 법학연구 Vol.29 No.4

This paper analyzes overseas non-financial information reporting directives introduced following increasing commitments to climate action and the growth of responsible investing. Moreover, this paper examines the ways to incorporate overseas reporting practices in Korea. It is necessary to be cautious in making non-financial disclosure mandatory since companies can bear the burden of implementing an ESG strategy. If regulations on investment are scrutinized based on non-financial factors such as ESG criteria, even companies that find it challenging to promote sustainable management as a going concern will not faithfully disclose relevant information. Therefore, to protect investors, measures to improve non-financial information reporting should be introduced to reduce information asymmetry. Non-financial disclosures associated with financial risks–such as ESG reporting-should be incorporated in listed companies’ business reports. Moreover, relevant regulatory frameworks should be reviewed to improve the reliability of disclosed information. In addition, it is necessary to reorganize the current reporting system for non-financial information such as ESG disclosure and introduce a unified reporting channel to increase investor access to ESG information. 최근 국제적인 무형자산투자나 ESG 투자에 대한 관심 고조 등을 배경으로 증장기적으로 재무적 영향을 미칠 가능성이 있는 비재무(ESG) 관련 정보의 중요성이 높아지고 있다. 그러나 국내기업에 의한 비재무(ESG) 관련 정보는 투자자가 요구하는 수준에는 아직 도달하지 못한 실정이다. 본 논문은 기후변화대응, 책임투자 확대 등에 따른 미국과 EU의 비재무(ESG) 관련 정보공시제도를 분석하고 향후 국내의 도입방안에 대해 고찰한 것이다. 비재무(ESG) 관련 정보는 기업수익 및 현금흐름의 성질 등 재무정보를 분석하기 위한 정보로서 매우 중요하며, 나아가 자본시장의 효율적인 자원배분에 이바지하는 것이다. 하지만 비재무(ESG) 관련 정보공시규제가 강화되면 계속기업으로서의 지속가능경영을 담보하기 어려운 기업들조차 관련 위험을 충실하게 공시하지 않을 가능성이 적지 않다. 투자자의 투자판단에 필요한 정보를 충분하고 적시에 알기 쉽게 제공함과 동시에 건설적인 대화에 이바지하는 정보공시를 촉진하기 위해서도 지속가능성 정보를 포함한 비재무(ESG) 관련 정보의 비대칭성 해소를 위한 방안 마련이 필요하다. 구체적으로 상장기업에 대해서는 재무적 위험성과 직결되는 비재무(ESG) 관련 정보를 법정공시제도로서 사업보고서에 의무적으로 기재하는 방안과 비재무(ESG) 관련 공시정보의 신뢰성과 질적 제고를 위한 제재기준 그리고 기업의 실무적 부담완화 등을 종합적으로 검토하여 마련할 필요가 있다. 아울러 기존의 비재무(ESG) 관련 정보에 부가하여 기본항목을 재정비하고 공시채널을 일원화하여 비재무(ESG) 관련 정보에 대한 투자자들의 접근성을 높일 필요가 있다는 점 등을 제시했다.

국제상사법원과 재판부 구성의 다양화

김정환 경상국립대학교 법학연구소 2025 법학연구 Vol.33 No.1

국가 간 무역이 증대되면서 국제상사분쟁의 수와 규모는 나날이 증가하고 있다. 국제상사분쟁을 적절히 해결하기 위해서는 국제상사분쟁의 특성에 맞는 적절한 분쟁해결수단이 마련되어야 한다. 국제상사분쟁의 전형적인 해결수단으로 활용되는 것은 국제상사중재이나, 최근 그 대안으로 국제상사법원이 등장하고 있다. 국제상사법원은 여러 국가에서 이미 설립되었거나 설립이 진행되고 있으며, 국제상사분쟁 해결을 위한 또 다른 대안으로 주목받고 있다. 이 글에서는 국제상사법원과 함께 국제상사법원의 주요한 특징으로 거론되고 있는 재판부 구성의 다양화에 대해 살펴보고자 한다. 특히 우리나라에서 국제상사법원을 설립해야 할 필요성과 국제상사법원의 설립을 가정할 때 현행 제도 하에서 재판부 구성의 다양화를 꾀함에 있어 장애가 되는 요소를 먼저 살피고, 재판부 구성의 다양화를 위해서는 현재의 여러 규정을 어떤 식으로 개정해야 할 것인지에 대해 그 방향을 제시하고자 한다. As trade between countries increases, the number and scale of international commercial disputes are increasing. In order to properly resolve international commercial disputes, appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms must be in place to suit the nature of international commercial disputes. International commercial arbitration is a typical means of resolving international commercial disputes, but recently, international commercial courts have emerged as an alternative. International commercial courts have been established or are in the process of being established in a number of countries and are gaining traction as an alternative means of resolving international commercial disputes. In this article, we will look at international commercial courts and the diversification of the composition of the court, which is considered to be a major feature of international commercial courts. In particular, this article will first examine the need to establish an international commercial court in Korea and the obstacles to diversifying the composition of the tribunal under the current system, assuming the establishment of an international commercial court, and then suggest how the current regulations should be amended to diversify the composition of the court.

공익적 언사와개인정보보호법

박경신 경상국립대학교 법학연구소 2025 법학연구 Vol.33 No.1

사회가 복잡해지면서 자신에 대한 정보를 기업이나 정부에 제공해야만 생활과 행복추 구에 긴요한 서비스를 받을 수 있는 경우가 늘어나고 있다. 개인정보보호법은, 서비스제 공자와 힘의 비대칭에 놓여 자신에 대한 정보의 향후 이용이나 제3자제공을 미리 제한할 협상력이 없는 정보주체를 ‘정보감시’ 또는 정보감시의 위험으로부터 오는 ‘위축효과’로부 터 보호하기 위해 고안된 법제로서 정보주체에게 자신에 대한 ‘모든’ 정보에 대해 강력한 통제권을 부여하는 것을 골자로 하고 있다. 즉 내밀성이 없는 정보에도 통제권을 부여하 고 있다. 한편 ‘모든’ 개인정보처리가 정보주체의 통제권 하에 놓여지면 도리어 힘없는 개인들의 표현의 자유나 알 권리가 제한되어 도리어 기업이나 정부에 대한 비판과 감시를 할 수 없게 되므로 법이 원래의 목적에 부합하게 기능하도록 하기 위해서는 정보주체의 통제권 을 정교하게 재단할 필요가 있다. 이를 위해 대부분의 개인정보보호법제들은 첫째 정보주 체에 대해 우위를 점하고 있는 ‘개인정보처리자’ 즉 수많은 정보주체들의 정보가 검색이 용이하게 모여진 집합체를 업무 목적으로 이용하고 있는 자에 한정하여 개인정보보호의 무를 적용하고 있고, 둘째 GDPR 및 GDPR이행입법들의 상당수는 공익을 위한 정보수집 및 제3자 정보제공을 정보주체 동의가 없더라도 허용하고 셋째 언론 “목적”의 정보처리 전반에 대해서 예외를 허용하고 있다. 우리나라의 개인정보보호법은 특히 공익적 언사가 활발히 이루어질 수 있도록 공익달 성을 목적으로 하는 개인정보처리 (제15조, 제17조, 제18조), 언론목적 정보처리 (제58 조), 개인정보처리자가 아닌 자에게도 개인정보보호의무를 부과할 위험이 있는 형사처벌 조항 (제59조) 등에 있어서 국제기준에 비추어 개정해야할 필요가 있다 Data protection laws aim to respond the need to protect data subjects, who need to obtain essential services from data controllers such as governments and corporations and therefore have to provide their personal data to the latter holding the overwhelming bargaining power, from the risk of ‘data surveillance’ and ‘chilling effects’ originating from such risk by granting them strong control over all of their personal data, regardless of their confidentiality. For the laws to operate properly for their purposes, that control must be carefully tailored so that powerless people can exercise their freedom of speech and right to information to criticize and monitor those data controllers with political or economic power. To that end, most data protection laws limit themselves to governing only the carefully defined “data controllers” with overwhelming power over data subjects; GDPR and other laws enacting GDPR allow nonconsensual data processing aimed at public interest; and also GDPR obligates the state parties to derogate the data protection rights in favor of freedom of expression. Korean law can catch up with the international standard by adding the public interest as a basis for data processing under Article 15, 17, and 18, increasing the scope of Article 58 concerning press exemption to cover journalistic sources, and abolishing Article 59 which has been interpreted to criminalize the conduct of people and entities who are not data controller and does not seem to include various balancing provisions in Articles 15, 17, and 18.

网络主播劳动法律关系的认定研究

환이즈,박상식 경상국립대학교 법학연구소 2025 법학연구 Vol.33 No.1

随着网络主播产业的迅速发展,涌现出众多平台、主播、工作室以及相关从业人员,直播业务的迅速发展不断衍生新的问题,这一领域的用工劳动关系如何认定产生了很大争议。在传统的雇佣模式中,劳动关系的确立通常基于三个核心标准:雇主与雇员的法律资格、雇员对雇主的人身及经济依赖性,以及工作与企业业务的关联程度。然而,网络主播用工模式已经超越了传统雇佣关系中对工作时间和工作场所的严格界定,展现出一种更为灵活、互动和多变的特点。在此背景下,传统的劳动关系认定标准已不再适应互联网直播行业这一新兴业态的用工需求。劳动关系认定与否也会继而牵涉到对直播中各方主体尤其是主播的各类权益保护及争议纠纷解决。 本文通过深入研究网络主播用工关系的发展背景、现状以及其特点,分析网络主播用工劳动关系在中国立法和司法上的现状,揭示在认定劳动关系时所面临的困境,特别是在劳动从属性的削弱、传统劳动关系认定理论的不适用性、直播平台合同性质的复杂性以及裁判思维的僵化等方面,分析网络主播行业的劳动关系认定问题,为中国政府和相关司法机关提供有关制定政策和法规的建议,希望能够为解决网络主播行业的劳动关系认定提供有益的建议。 With the rapid development of the online streaming industry, numerous platforms, streamers, studios, and related professionals have emerged. The growth of streaming operations has led to new challenges, particularly in the identification of employment relationships, which has become a significant point of contention. In traditional employment models, establishment of an employment relationship is typically based on three core criteria: the legal qualifications of the employer and employee, the employee's personal and economic dependence on the employer and the relevance of the work to the business operations of the company. However, the employment model in the online streaming industry has surpassed the traditional employment relationship's strict of working hours and workplaces, showcasing a more flexible, interactive, and dynamic feature. In this context, the traditional standards for identifying employment relationships are no longer suitable the employment needs of the emerging online streaming industry. Whether or not an employment relationship is recognized can also affect the protection of various rights of the parties involved in the, especially the streamers, and the resolution of disputes. This article delves into the development background, current situation, and characteristics of online streaming employment relationships It analyzes the current legislative and judicial status of online streaming employment relationships, revealing the difficulties in identifying employment relationships, particularly in the weakening of labor subordination, the applicability of traditional employment relationship theories, the complexity of streaming platform contract nature, and the rigidity of judicial thinking. By analyzing these issues, the article suggestions for policymakers and relevant judicial authorities, hoping to offer beneficial advice for solving the identification of employment relationships in the online streaming industry.

자치경찰제도의 현황과 입법정책적 개선방안

정태종 경상국립대학교 법학연구소 2024 법학연구 Vol.32 No.1

Local autonomy was stipulated after the 1948 Constitution, but actual local autonomy was only implemented after the 1991 local elections, The autonomous police system, which is the final puzzle of local autonomy and decentralization, was introduced in December 2020 as a unified form centered on the national police through the revised "The Action on the Organization and Operation of National Police and Autonomous Police". As it has been implemented for the past two and a half years since July 2021, limitations and problems of the current autonomous police system are emerging. There is also a growing question of whether the current autonomous police will be able to provide security administration that reflects the original purpose, completion of decentralization of autonomy, and the demand of local residents. This article examines the basis and status of the autonomous police system currently in effect, and derives the structural limitations of the autonomous police system. In order to overcome the limitations of the autonomous police system, the autonomous police system must secure independent and specific authority, organization, and budget. As a concrete improvement plan for this, first, it is necessary to organize an independent autonomous police organization and actual autonomous police personnel, and in the long run, switch to a dual autonomous police system. Second, it is necessary to secure clarity and specify individual authority actors through amendments to the Police Act to overcome the border problem of ambiguous concepts and categories of autonomous police affairs. Third, a resident-friendly self-governing police system should be established through the composition of the self-governing police committee at the basic unit and the enactment of self-governing police affairs ordinances. Fourth, local citizenship should be strengthened in the qualifications of members of the Autonomous Police Commission. Fifth, legislative policy improvements should be made, such as the improvement of the legal system for securing the autonomous police budget, the establishment of taxes such as the autonomous police grant tax, the autonomous police tax, and the local fiscal adjustment system.

준항고의 취소대상으로 압수․수색 중 ‘수색’처분만 취소가 가능한지 여부 - 대법원 2022. 11. 8.자 2021모3291 결정과 관련하여 -

노신정 경상국립대학교 법학연구소 2024 법학연구 Vol.32 No.1

The decision of the Supreme Court on November 8, 2022, Case No. 2021Mo3291, addressed issues related to quasi-appeal (준항고) concerning legal interests, the scope of participation rights guarantee, the legality of the seizure target, and the scope of cancellation. Specifically, the subject decision stated that even in cases where the subject of the quasi-appeal had "searched" but not "seized" items in the National Assembly office, the search disposition had already ended. ㅆhere was no existing "outcome," it is necessary to appropriately control the illegal search disposition of the investigative agency. If a violation of the basic rights of the people occurrs due to an illegal search, it is necessary to restore it. The decision emphasized that there is a need to cancel the illegal execution of a search warrant even if there is no subsequent seizure following an illegal search. The quasi-appellant, in this case, was not seeking the annulment of the results of the search warrant execution but demanded the cancellation of the illegal execution of the search warrant. It was noted that if the illegality of the execution is confirmed, the quasi-appellant could avoid punishment for the charge of obstruction of official duties related to the execution. Article 417 of the Criminal Procedure Act pertains to quasi-appeal, which is a type of administrative appeal against the decisions of prosecutors or judicial police officers within the administrative branch. In situations where the investigative agency has not seized any results from the quasi-appellant and the execution has already concluded, the question arises whether only the "search" disposition, which is an act practically irrecoverable in such circumstances, can be canceled. It is necessary to examine whether there is a "legal interest" after the disposition has ended. The Criminal Procedure Act, up to Article 215, uses the term "seizure, search, or verification" without distinguishing between seizure and search. However, Article 417 specifically regulates "seizure" and does not mention "search." Therefore, it can be argued that if the disposition related to the search is considered, it becomes part of the quasi-appeal, along with the seizure disposition. If there is no property seized, it may not be possible to cancel only the search disposition separately, or it may be considered that there is no subject to cancel as a quasi-appeal. In other words, it cannot be considered that the 'search' disposition can be canceled in general due to the decision of the Supreme Court on November 8, 2022, Case No. 2021Mo3291.

국가보훈과 국가유공자에 대한 공법적 고찰

박지근 경상국립대학교 법학연구소 2024 법학연구 Vol.32 No.1

Veterans Affairs, in a dictionary sense, refers to the reward of meritorious service to a meritorious person or his/her bereaved family in the country in honor of the patriotism of a person of national merit. Veterans can be a reward for those who have contributed to the creation of a national community, or a culture that is the basis for community integration and development. For this reason, our Constitution also has direct and indirect regulations on veterans. Article 32 (6) of the Constitution stipulates that "the bereaved families of persons of national merit, Sangyi Military Police, and war dead are given priority opportunities to work as prescribed by law." It can be said that it stipulates the state's comprehensive obligations to people of national merit. If it is understood that the guarantee of preferential working opportunities under Article 32 (6) of the Constitution exemplifies a comprehensive obligation to honor those of national merit, such as the Constitutional Court, the meaning of national merit under Article 32 (6) of the Constitution becomes even more important. When reviewing a sign that can confirm the extension of the concept of a person of national merit under the Constitution, the concept of "person entitled to veterans" in Article 3, No. 2 of the Framework Act on Patriots and Veterans Affairs is the most referenceable. There are four ways to analyze and improve laws related to veterans and national merit. First, the effectiveness of the Framework Act on Veterans of Korea must be secured. Second, the independence of the Veterans Affairs Review Committee should be strengthened under the National Merit Act. Third, it is necessary to recognize the disposition of the decision of the Major Accident Review Committee under the Military Personnel Act. Finally, it should be easy to recognize those who died of self-harm as national merit or those eligible for compensation for veterans' compensation.

헌법의 관점에서 본 교권과 학생인권의 관계

장영수 경상국립대학교 법학연구소 2024 법학연구 Vol.32 No.1

The recent controversy over the overthrow of school authority, such as Such as attacks by students on teachers, abuse of power by parents and unreasonable behavior of schools and education authorities, is a reflection of the past attacks by teachers on students, abuse of power by teachers, and the decadence of schools and education authorities that only side with teachers put. However, normal education doesn't look like that either. Therefore, one of the important reasons for the repeated misuse of teaching authority and abuse of power by students and parents is to look at educational issues from a microscopic perspective, sometimes teacher-centered and sometimes student-centered, instead of looking at the whole to balance the structure of education from a broad perspective to design. Therefore, solving the recent problem should not be about restoring teaching competence through empowering teachers. Because instead of reducing unreasonable demands or abuse of power by students or parents, there may be an increase in inappropriate behavior or abuse of power by teachers. The right way to solve the problem is to reorganize the relationship between teachers and students (and parents) as partners or collaborators in educational success, rather than viewing it as an adversarial relationship playing a zero-sum game. In other words, not viewing the relationship between teachers and students as adversarial relationships between employees and employers, but rather rationally organizing the share of teacher and student on the common denominator of desirable education would be a key to solving the problem.