미국의 프라이머리(예비선거) 제도에 관한 연구

이상돈 중앙대학교 법학연구원 2010 法學論文集 Vol.34 No.3

So-called ‘open primary’ has been a hotly discussed topic in Korea recent years. Though politicians in both sides have been talked about the open primary, there has never been serious concern of its possible conflict with the political party’s right for the self-determination and self-regulation which is guaranteed by the Constitution. This article analyzes the origin and development of primary election system of the United States with special emphasis on the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court. Primary replaced the caucus as a mechanism to select parties’ candidate during late 1890’s and early 1900’s. Most states adopted ‘closed primary’, and later many states adopted ‘open primary’. Some states, notably the State of Washington adopted ‘blanket primary’ which allows people to vote for any body in any party. As blanket primary permits so-called ‘split vote’ and ‘cross-voting, it raised controversies. Political parties argued the blanket primary violates their rights of association guaranteed by the First Amendment of U.S. Constitution. The State of California later adopted the blanket primary only to be declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000. After the U.S. Supreme Court decision, the State of Washington changed its primary system to ‘top two primary’ which has been first invented by the State of Lousiana. The U.S. Supreme Court decided the new kind of non-partisan primary as constitutional in 2008. Then the State of California adopted the top two primary in 2010 which will be used from the election of 2012. The State of Louisina also decided to use this system again in 2010. This is a very interesting phenomenon in the U.S. primary system. The articles concludes that ‘top two primary’ is very ideal for Korea as the system is non-partisan and run by the government. It is especially meaningful as a tool to curtail the parties’ bosses’ undue influence which is a major problem in Korean politics.

미국의 프라이머리(예비선거) 제도에 관한 연구 : 미국의 프라이머리의 발전과 관련 판례, 그리고 그것이 우리나라에게 주는 정책적 함의

李相敦(Lee, Sang-Don) 中央大學校 法學硏究所 2010 法學論文集 Vol.34 No.3

So-called 'open primary' has been a hotly discussed topic in Korea recent years. Though politicians in both sides have been talked about the open primary, there has never been serious concern of its possible conflict with the political party's right for the self-determination and self-regulation which is guaranteed by the Constitution. This article analyzes the origin and development of primary election system of the United States with special emphasis on the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court. Primary replaced the caucus as a mechanism to select parties' candidate during late 1890's and early 1900's. Most states adopted 'closed primary', and later many states adopted 'open primary'. Some states, notably the State of Washington adopted 'blanket primary' which allows people to vote for any body in any party. As blanket primary permits so-called 'split vote' and 'cross-voting, it raised controversies. Political parties argued the blanket primary violates their rights of association guaranteed by the First Amendment of U.S. Constitution. The State of California later adopted the blanket primary only to be declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000. After the U.S. Supreme Court decision, the State of Washington changed its primary system to 'top two primary' which has been first invented by the State of Lousiana. The U.S. Supreme Court decided the new kind of non-partisan primary as constitutional in 2008. Then the State of California adopted the top two primary in 2010 which will be used from the election of 2012. The State of Louisina also decided to use this system again in 2010. This is a very interesting phenomenon in the U.S. primary system. The articles concludes that 'top two primary' is very ideal for Korea as the system is non-partisan and run by the government. It is especially meaningful as a tool to curtail the parties' bosses' undue influence which is a major problem in Korean politics.

‘정당약화론’과 국민경선제 지속성

채진원 한국사회과학연구회 2020 동향과 전망 Vol.- No.109

In the meantime, the opposition to the open primary has insisted on the soᐨ called “Party Weakness of Theses on the Open Primary” that the open primary weakens the identity of the party by involving ordinary voters and citizens rather than party members. this article raises the question that it is necessary to tentatively confirm the experiences of 15 years from the 16th presidential election to the 19th presidential election on the basis of theoretical discussion on whether the open primary is really causing political weakness. the purpose of this article is to prove that candidates through open primary are candidates for political parties that have a competitive edge by receiving a rational choice of voters rather than nonᐨopen primary candidates as an example of the past 15 years of presidential elections and parliamentary elections and indirectly, that open primary does not weaken ‘network party model’ through open primary continuity. the results of this study are summarized as follows. as reviewed in Chapters Ⅲ and Ⅳ, it can be seen that the effect of open primary on competitiveness of the open primary that lasted for 15 years is significantly different from the case where open primary is introduced and vice versa. this persistent difference in results over the last 15 years is a rational choice for openᐨprimary candidates to elect a candidate who is more competitive than the nonᐨopen primary for voters, it is very likely that the current status has been maintained. as a result of this persistence, it can be deduced that the “Party Weakness of Theses on the Open Primary” is an inadequate claim on the empirical level as well as theoretical level. 그동안 국민경선제를 반대하는 측에서는 국민경선제가 당원이 아닌 일반 유권자와 시민들을 참여시킴으로써 정당의 정체성을 약화시킨다고 하는 이른바 ‘국민경선제 정당약화론’을 주장해 왔다. 이 글은 국민경선제가 정말로 정당 약화를 초래하는 것인지에 대해 이론적인 논의에 기초하여 16대 대선부터 19대 대선까지 15 년간 지속되고 있는 경험을 잠정적으로 확인해 볼 필요가 있다는 것을 문제로 제기한다. 이 글의 목적은 국민경선제도를 통한 후보가 비국민경선제의 후보보다 유권자들의 합리적인 선택을 받음으로써 본선 경쟁력이 있는 정당의 공천 방식이라는것을 지난 15년간의 대선과 총선의 경험 사례로 확인하고, 국민경선제의 지속성을 통해 국민경선제도가 ‘네트워크정당’의 정체성을 약화시키지 않는다는 것을 간접적으로 설명하는 데 있다. 이 연구의 결과는 다음과 같이 요약된다. 제3장과 제4 장에서 검토한 것처럼 15년간 지속된 국민경선제도의 본선 경쟁력 효과는 국민경선제를 도입한 경우가 그 반대의 경우보다 확연하게 결과의 차이가 크다는 것을 확인할 수 있다. 지난 15년간의 이런 지속적인 결과의 차이는 유권자들에게 국민경선제도가 비국민경선제도보다 본선 경쟁력이 있는 후보를 선출할 수 있는 합리적선택 방식이고, 이것의 지속성에 따라 정당의 지지기반도 확대되거나 최소한 현상유지되었을 가능성이 크다. 이런 지속성의 결과를 볼 때, ‘국민경선제 정당약화론’ 은 이론적인 차원에서뿐만 아니라 경험적 차원에서 적절하지 않은 주장이라고 추론할 수 있다는 점이다.

정당의 공직선거후보자 선출에 있어서의 역선택(Party Raiding) 문제 -미연방대법원의 판결 분석을 통한 대안 마련을 위하여-

최병훈 ( Byung Hoon Choi ) 안암법학회 2013 안암 법학 Vol.0 No.40

The representative democracy realizes the sovereignty of the people through the election of a representative. Specially the political parties are going to accomplish their platform with a law and a nation policies by the winning their standard-bearers nominating to the public official election in the political party democracy. Korean major political parties are enforced the direct primary election system in the process of intraparty competing nomination. Korean major political parties permit unaffiliated electorates to vote in the nomination of candidates and they make use of surveys of public opinions of the candidates in high proportion in evaluation. It casts serious doubts whether distortes the party`s ideology and representation or not. The concern about party nonmembers selecting party nominees addresses the problems of crossing over and raiding. Party raiding describes a tactic in American politics where members of one party vote in another party`s primary election in an effort to either nominate a weaker candidate or prolong divided support between two or more contenders for that party`s nomination (especially for president). The Jones district court addressed whether blanket primaries violated the freedom to associate in practice. The court rejected the parties` arguments that the blanket primary severely burdens parties` First Amendment association right merely because it encourages crossover voting, a phenomenon where a person not associated with a party votes in that party`s primary. It explained that blanket primary laws are not severe because blanket primaries do not increase the prevalence of party raiding, the most egregious type of crossover voting. In reaching this conclusion, the court distinguished between three different motivations behind crossover voting: sincerity, strategy, and raiding. In assessing the threat of party raiding, the court was persuaded by the "almost unanimity" among experts, who agree that party raiding is not a realistic threat under blanket primaries. Unlike the district court, the Supreme Court found that the blanket primary law must withstand strict scrutiny because it characterized the burden on parties` association right as severe. But, these analysis of Party Raiding are the results. "First, True Raiding is unlikely. Second, Raiding is theoretically possible in all primary systems. Third, Raiding is a party problem, not a government problem." (Deidra A. Foster, 29 SEAULR 449, at 478-480) Also, according to the empirical analysis, no evidence of organized Raiding appeared in any election. That is to say, the bad influence of Party Raiding is modest to nonexistent. The Court in Jones proposes a "Nonpartisan" Primary. The Court concluded that a nonpartisan primary would serve the state`s interests without imposing severe burdens on political parties` freedom of association right. According to the analysis the Jones Court`s proposed nonpartisan primary or the Louisiana blanket primary, one will find that the systems are unconstitutional. Therefore I propose the open primary system based on the classifi- cation between party membership and party affiliation.

On the Primary-Face Proof in Civil Litigation in China

Tao Ting 원광대학교 한중관계연구원 2020 韓中關係硏究 Vol.6 No.1

중국은 현재 사법실무에 있어 판사가 사실추정을 통하여 판결함으로써 당사자의 이 익을 해치고, 사법공신력을 초래하는 등 사실추정을 통한 재판을 남발하는 사례가 발 생하고 있다. 그 이유는 첫째, 사실추정 규정의 광범위성이 판사에게 사실을 추정할 여지를 제공 하고, 사실추정에 있어 그 요건에 있어서도 구체적인 사실과 일상생활 경험에 대응하 는 개연성의 정도 차이가 매우 크다. 이로 인해 판사가 개연성이 낮은 사실에 대해서도 사실추정을 하여 당사자의 거증책임을 면제할 수 있다. 둘째, 법관의 자질이 높지 않아 사실추정에 대한 이해가 부족하여 사실추정을 오용할 수 있다는 것이다. 실무에서 사 실추정을 잘못한 사례가 많아 독일과 중국 학계에서 표현증명으로 대체하자는 주장이 나오고 있다. 따라서 중국은 판사가 사법권을 남용하여 당사자의 이익을 침해하는 것을 막기 위하 여 판사가 사건의 진실에 대해 확신을 갖도록 하는 표현증명제도를 도입할 필요가 있다. As an important system in the law of evidence, the primary-face proof gradually developed after the implementation of the German Civil Procedure Law of 1877. Especially after the implementation of the law, difficulties from the thinking mode of legal evidence turns to free proof, also regarded as the premise of the development of the primary-face proof system by theorists. Based on the deep accumulation of theories and legal precedents, and the irreplaceable role of primary-face proof in proof of causality and accountability in judicial practice, the German Civil Procedure Law recognized the primary-face proof in specific cases in 2005. In practice, the German Court of Appeal often used the primary-face proof as a means of correcting the facts determined by lower courts. Therefore, it is of great significance to strengthen the judges' free proof and to relieve the litigants’ difficulty in proving causation and fault. In China’s current judicial practice, there are a large number of cases in which the factual presumption of judging is abused. The judges deliberately use the presumption of fact to damage the interests of litigants, resulting in the lack of judicial credibility. The first reason is that the broadness of the factual presumption gives the space for the judge to operate freely, because the specific known facts required by the factual presumption and the probability correspond with daily life experience is quite different, Judges, by factual presumption, can also exempt the litigants from the responsibility of giving proof in view of the fact that the probability is low; secondly, the quality of the judge is not high, imperfect understanding of the factual presumption leads to misusing of factual presumption. There are a large number of wrongdoings of factual presumption in practice, so there is a claim in both German and Chinese academic circles to replace the factual presumption with primary-face proof. Therefore, China should introduce a system of primary-face proof to make it parallel with the factual presumption. These two systems should be applied according to the strength of the probability, so that judges can form a conviction on the facts of the case, and to prevent the judge from abusing the judicial power and harming the interests of the litigants in order to achieve fairness and justice.

건물 특성에 따른 냉수 순환 펌핑 시스템 별 에너지 소모량 분석

신동신(Dong-Shin Shin),박성빈(Sung-Bin Park),전태익(Tae-Ik Jun),마강일(Kang-Il Ma),김태홍(Tae-Hong Kim),이성구(Sung-Goo Lee) 대한설비공학회 2016 설비공학 논문집 Vol.28 No.6

This study analyzed the energy consumption of a building pump system that was originally equipped with a primary-secondary zone pump system. Using the HYSYS program the energy consumption of the primary pump system was compared with the primary-secondary zone pump system. The primary-secondary zone pump system consumes less energy than the originally designed primary pump system. When the distance between the machine room and each building is assumed to be equal, the primary pump system can be more efficient than the primary-secondary zone pump system with decreasing the distance. When the distance is 120 m, the primary system consumes less total annual energy than the primary-secondary zone pump system and saves 2,773 kWh. The suggested energy evaluation program can be useful if the designer seeks a more efficient pump system.

The Clinical Significance of Occult Gastrointestinal Primary Tumours in Metastatic Cancer: A Population Retrospective Cohort Study

Malek B. Hannouf,Eric Winquist,Salaheddin M. Mahmud,Muriel Brackstone,Sisira Sarma,George Rodrigues,Peter K. Rogan,Jeffrey S. Hoch,Gregory S. Zaric 대한암학회 2018 Cancer Research and Treatment Vol.50 No.1

Purpose The purpose of this study was to estimate the incidence of occult gastrointestinal (GI) primary tumours in patients with metastatic cancer of uncertain primary origin and evaluate their influence on treatments and overall survival (OS). Materials and Methods We used population heath data from Manitoba, Canada to identify all patients initially diagnosed with metastatic cancer between 2002 and 2011. We defined patients to have “occult” primary tumour if the primary was found at least 6 months after initial diagnosis. Otherwise, we considered primary tumours as “obvious.” We used propensity-score methods to match each patient with occult GI tumour to four patients with obvious GI tumour on all known clinicopathologic features. We compared treatments and 2-year survival data between the two patient groups and assessed treatment effect on OS using Cox regression adjustment. Results Eighty-three patients had occult GI primary tumours, accounting for 17.6% of men and 14% of women with metastatic cancer of uncertain primary. A 1:4 matching created a matched group of 332 patients with obvious GI primary tumour. Occult cases compared to the matched group were less likely to receive surgical interventions and targeted biological therapy, and more likely to receive cytotoxic empiric chemotherapeutic agents. Having an occult GI tumour was associated with reduced OS and appeared to be a nonsignificant independent predictor of OS when adjusting for treatment differences. Conclusion GI tumours are the most common occult primary tumours in men and the second most common in women. Patients with occult GI primary tumours are potentially being undertreated with available GI site-specific and targeted therapies.

국민경선제 도입에 따른 젠더효과 분석

김현희(Kim Hyun Hee),오유석(Oh Yoo Seok),박인혜(Park Inn Hea) 비판사회학회 2017 경제와 사회 Vol.- No.116

본 연구는 2014년 지방선거를 중심으로 국민경선제 또는 상향식 공천제가 여성의 정치적 대표성 확대에 어떠한 결과를 초래할 것인가에 대해 여성정치인의 경험을 중심으로 다음의 질문에 답하고자 하였다. ① 한국 사회에서 실시하려고 하는 국민경선제는 과연 민주적이고 공정한가?; ② 여성정치인들은 왜 국민경선제가 그들에게 불리하다고 생각하는가?; ③ 여성 정치인들이 불리하다고 판단하는 근저에는 어떠한 기제들이 작동하고 있는가? 우리의 결론은 국민경선제가 정당민주주의가 발전하지 않은 정치후진국에서는 민주적이고 공정한 제도가 아닐 수 있다는 것이다. 여성정치인의 관점에서 보면, 현재의 국민경선제는 다음과 같은 많은 문제점을 내포하고 있다. 첫째, 국민경선 과정에서 남성지역위원장의 독점적인 영향력, 현직 효과, 정당의 공적 가부장제적 특성 등이 여성정치인에게 불리하게 작용한다. 둘째, 남성 중심주의와 강한 연고주의문화가 국민경선제의 효과를 방해한다. 셋째, 국민경선이 국민들의 관심과 이해의 부족으로 인해 경선 자체가 후보의 동원선거, 조직선거의 양상으로 흐르게 되고, 이와 비례해 결국 돈이 많이 드는 선거가 되어 여성에게 불리하다. 또한 공천 절차나 규칙들이 매우 가변적이고, 관료제적 방식으로 운영되지 못함으로써 정보력이 약한 여성들은 정치권에 진입하기 어렵게 된다. 이러한 성별 불균형의 한국 정치구조 속에서 국민경선제라는 제도의 형식적 민주성이나 공정성은 큰 의미를 갖지 못한다. 국민경선제가 갖는 본래의 취지인 민주성, 개방성, 분권성을 충분히 구현하기 위해서는 정당 민주화가 저조한 한국의 현실적 여건과 부합하는 국민경선제 모델을 탐색하고 개발해서 그것을 정착시켜야 할 것이다. This paper investigates impacts of open primary or bottom-up nomination process of party candidates on expansion of political representativeness of women, based on the experiences of women politicians in the 2014 local election. This paper tries to answer following questions like, 1) Is the open primary system which Korean society is about to introduce, fair or democratic? 2) Why do many women politicians consider open primary disadvantageous against women? 3) What kind of mechanism works as basis on which women think unfair? Our conclusion is that open primary may not be a democratic or fair system for politically less developing countries which do not have full fledged party democracy. From the women politicians’ perspective, the current open primary system implemented in Korea contains the following problems. First, factors like, monopolistic influence of male chairperson of party’s regional committee, incumbency advantage, intraparty patriarchal management, to list a few, work against women politicians. Second, culture of male chauvinism and strong nepotism hinders the positive impacts of open primary. Third, due to the lack of interest and understanding on the open primary, primary itself shapes up to be mobilization campaign and organization election by candidates, and thus leads to spend more money for campaigns, leaving more disadvantageous against women candidates. Fourth, the candidate selection procedures or rules, which are too much abruptly changeable and aren’t managed under bureaucratic mechanism, make more difficult for women who have relatively weak information network in the political arena. Therefore, under the severe gender power imbalance in Korean political system, open primary doesn’t bring genuine democratic property and fairness as institution and only touches its mere formality. In order to realize the real intent of open primary, such as democratic property, openness, and decentralization, it is imperative to explore, develop and establish an open primary model suitable to Korean situation which has poor party democratization.

New RGB primary for various multimedia systems

Byongtae Ryu,김경태,하영상,배재우,이승배,송준호,이기용,이장두,김경현,김학선 한국정보디스플레이학회 2014 Journal of information display Vol.15 No.2

Color gamut is one of the most important performance indicators of multimedia systems because a wide color gamut enables the reproduction of more real surface colors. The color gamut of multimedia systems depends on the RGB (red-green-blue) primary. There are various RGB primaries, such as ITU-R BT.709, ITU-R BT.2020, sRGB, Adobe RGB, and DCI-P3. ITU-RBT.709 and sRGB have a very small color gamut, while ITU-R BT.2020 has an extremely wide one. Adobe RGB and DCI-P3 have RGB primaries with the characteristics of color printers and digital cinema projectors, respectively. Also, some of these RGB primaries are not compatible with each other. Thus, the contents of a system should be converted for use in other systems. This paper proposes an RGB primary for use in various multimedia systems. In the proposed method, sRGB, Adobe RGB, and DCI-P3 – the most frequently used RGB primaries – are unified. In this paper, the color gamut efficiency and human visual preference of the proposed RGB primary are checked. The proposed RGB primary is expected to be utilized as an international-standard RGB primary for multimedia systems.

2008 미국의 대통령 예비선거

안순철(Sooncheol An) 한국아메리카학회 2008 美國學論集 Vol.40 No.3

The 2008 U.S. Presidential Primary sounded alarm bells over the institutional problems of the current primary-centered nominating system while making distinguished record of frontloading. The 2008 calendar was the most frontloaded with respect to the delegates at stake and the number of primaries. The current primary system takes credit for its democratic value and openness, at which the 1972 McGovern-Fraser was directed, but the race to the front among state parties and its aggravation in the 2008 primary is again boosting the necessity of a new institutional reform. This article illuminates major reform movement, such as a national primary plan, rotating regional primary plan, Delaware plan, and American plan. These plans are approached and examined in terms of principles like meaningful choices, fair representation, and the quality of political discourse. This article notes a form of grouped primaries which may feature the merits of American and Delaware plan in order to avoid the trend toward a national primary.