RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      검색결과 좁혀 보기

      • 좁혀본 항목

      • 좁혀본 항목 보기순서

        • 원문유무
        • 음성지원유무
        • 원문제공처
        • 등재정보
        • 학술지명
        • 주제분류
        • 발행연도
        • 작성언어
        • 저자

      오늘 본 자료

      • 오늘 본 자료가 없습니다.
      더보기
      • 무료
      • 기관 내 무료
      • 유료
      • 配分參與權의 槪念과 法的 性格에 관한 一考察

        류시조 釜山外國語大學校 1998 外大論叢 Vol.18 No.3

        The purpose of this study is to research the conceptual import of the right of the participation in distribution(Teilhaberecht) and it's legal character. The right on the participation oin distribution would be called a social fundamental right or social right. A social fundamental right is the right to claim a presentation about goods and acts against the state. Today, the individual rights of liberty ends to have not a full effect of protecting real liberty, because citizens have been deprived of the social preconditions of it's rights and lost the capability of possessing it's own rights. Therefore the liberty is't present and real for citizen in these circumstances. From now on, it is necessary to reconsider the meanings and legal character of the right of liberty and empathize the beneficiary character on the rights of liberty. This study aims to deduce the right of the participation in distribution from the right of liberty. But our purpose is sometimes criticized in legal theory that the right of liberty is a negative-defensive right and the other hand the right on the participation in distribution is a positive right. So some portion of scholar denies the concept of the right on the paricipation in distribution. In this paper, we'd like to reexplain the right of liberty and to overcome the traditional theoretical limitation of the right of liberty in order to enhance the quality of life or liberty. We can conclude as following; All the fundamental right have a character of objective institutions as well as a subjective right, and the right on the participation in distribution is the right that has the complementary function of the liberty in order to participate in the process of a sort of distribution of goods and acts. The right of claims of the benefit(Leistungsrecht) is different from the right on the paricipation in distribution, the former is the right of claims that aims for a present benefit, but on the other the latter is the right of claims that doesn't always aims for a real benefit and sometimes aims to participate in the process of distribution for the present or future benefit. In the end, the distributive right that means the possibility of the reservation for the participation in distribution is the right of the possibility of the reservation for guaranteeing the minimum standard of the conditions of fulfilling the fundamental right. Today modern state have the duty to grarantee these condition.s But in the oong run, there is no doubt that these problem are a political and financial things. Nevertheless the right on the participation in distribution is very important for citizen to realize his own liberty, the right also has a set limitations.

      • KCI등재
      • KCI등재
      • KCI등재

        지방자치제의 보장을 위한 논의와 한계

        류시조(Ryu Si-Jo) 한국비교공법학회 2010 公法學硏究 Vol.11 No.1

        독일에 있어서 자치단체의 자치구역 통폐합을 수행하는 가운데서 자치제도 보장론의 검토가 제기된 바와 같이 우리나라도 지방행정구역 통폐합이나 지방행정체제 개편 논의에 앞서 헌법상의 제도보장론의 검토를 필요로 하고, 그 결과 지방자치제도를 위하여 기본권이론을 제도보장에 원용하는 문제가 제기될 수 있다. 다만 기본권이론을 무비판적으로 제도의 영역에 도입하고, 한쪽 영역의 관념?방법을 다른 한 쪽에 전용하는 것은 신중히 고려되어야 할 것이다. 그러나 지방자치제도의 보장을 위한 기본권이론을 원용함에 있어서는 양자의 '법률유보'와 '본질보장'이라는 요소가 가지는 법리적 상대성을 계기로 삼아 기본권보장론의 보장성과를 지방자치제도에 도입한 결과 첫째, 지방자치의 제도보장의 성격으로 제도적 기본권론의 논리와 달리하여 자치단체의 주관적 법적 지위가 인정되고, 둘째, 지방자치의 보장대상은 자치단체가 아니라 자치제도이며, 셋째, 지방자치의 실효적 보호수단으로 자치단체의 사법구제의 논리는 기본권의 그것과 달리하며, 넷째, 제도의 본질영역과 주변영역은 상대성을 가지며, 입법권에 의한 제도의 주변영역형성가능도 법치국가원리에 입각하여 통제가능하다는 점에서 그 보장효과에 있어서 기본권의 보장효과와 크게 차이가 없게 된다는 점이다. 그리고 이상과 같은 제도보장론에 입각해서 우리나라 지방자치제도 개혁론에 관한 논의에 있어서 대입해보면 대체로 다음과 같은 결론을 얻을 수 있을 것이다. 즉, 지방자치단체와 같은 공법인은 기본권주체는 아니지만 기본권주체와 유사한 일종의 주관적 법적 지위를 가진다고 할 수 있다. 그리고 이에 입각하여 자치권보장을 위한 권리구제 수단의 경우 그 논리는 기본권 주체이기 때문은 아니라는 것이며, 지방자치제도의 보장대상은 개개의 자치단체가 아니라 자치제도라는 기능이라고 보고, 자치단체는 지방행정구역 통폐합이나 지방행정체제 개편에 관한 입법사항에 관해서는 자치권침해로 주장할 수 없게 된다. 또한 입법에 의한 제도형성 가능성에 있어서도 입법권의 통제는 결국 과잉금지나 공공복리의 원칙과 같은 법치국가원리에 따른다는 점에서 제도보장의 공동화는 상당히 저지될 수 있다. A constitutional guarantee of institution is regarded as the legal character of system of local autonomy. But the existing traditional theory on the guarantee of institution was not effective guaranteed device for the right of th autonomy. There is a tendency to introduce the theory of the fundamental right into the theory of the institutional guarantee, and to strengthen the institutional guarantee of the local autonomy. It's tendency was also resulted from a vacillation of the foundation of the theory of the institutional guarantee that came from it's conceptual unclarity and it's difficulty in definition of contents and emergence of the theory of institutional fundamental right, etc. We can find a clear difference of between Institution and Rights in forms of it's regulation and it's legal character, it's contents. We can conclude that it's way of thinking are very different each other as followings.; on a premise of a sharp distinction between Institution and Rights, a theory of the institutional guarantee is based on a direction from Institution to Rights, a theory of the institutional fundamental rights is based on a direction from Rights to Institution. The institutional guarantee is not a legal form to forming and creating something new, but is to guarantee its contents that is protected as the guaranteed object that is declared normative institution. Only introducing the theory of fundamental rights into the theory of Institutional Guarantee in the local autonomy, we should consider carefully that the former introduce into the latter uncritically, and the concept and methodology of the latter also convert into the former.

      • KCI등재후보
      • KCI등재후보
      • KCI등재후보

        헌법 개정의 논의방향

        류시조 한국비교공법학회 2006 公法學硏究 Vol.7 No.3

        Direction of Discussion on Amendment of the Constitution- Focused on the Power Structure -Ryu, Si-JoThe methodology of amendment of the constitution is very important to establish the direction and to comprehend the character of amendment of the constitution. For this purpose, especially I would like to suggest five W's and one H principles(whowhenwherewhywhathow) for discussion on amendment. We can discuss several topics on the constitutional power structure on the basis of five W's and one H principles. The analysis on the basis of five W's and one H principles is the necessity and the subjecthood, the framework, the time, the method, the object of the constitutional amendment discussion. The basic direction and character of present constitutional amendment discussion can be possibly summarized in reinforcing popular sovereignty and activating parliamentarism, fixing responsible politics. And We have try to enlarge the subject of the constitutional amendment discussion to all the citizens, to open the framework of the discussion for justness and transparency of the amendment discussion. Also in that manner, we can examine many issues on the time and the method, the object of the constitutional amendment. Finally, I can suggest some conclusions for the revision as followings; There are changing the single term system of president to reelection system, reforming the relative majority representation and the second ballot system in president election, abolishing prime ministerial system and introducing vice-presidential system together with bicameral system, reforming the Board of Audit and Inspection and the constitutional court.

      • KCI등재

        韓國 憲法上의 文化國家原理에 관한 硏究

        류시조 한국헌법학회 2008 憲法學硏究 Vol.14 No.3

        This paper aims to study the principle of the cultural state in korean Constitution. In order to this purpose, we examine the formation of the conception of a cultural state, the function and legal contents, realization and limitation of the principle of the cultural state. Today we called modern state is a cultural state, it is very difficult to define the conception of cultural state, and it is not clear what is the conception and contents of the cultural state. The conception of cultural state was appeared in according to the change of a state structure. But the conception of the cultural state is different in it's meaning according to the relationship between state and culture, which bring about transfiguration of state and culture. The contents of the cultural state may be also subject to great variation according to the conception of the culture. Because the concept of culture is very various, and it's meaning is also very inclusive. But we conclude that the function and legal contents of the principle of the cultural state as follows; the functions of the principle of the cultural state are a promotion of the traditional culture, a realization of the dignity and value of the human being, and supplement of the ideology of the democracy, etc. And the legal characteristic of the principle of the cultural state resolves itself into the following four points; a quality of the anti-totalitarian state, the peaceful state, a welfare state, a democratic state. 문화국가원리는 현대헌법의 기본원리 중의 하나이면서도 다른 헌법상의 정치 경제상의 기본원리에 비하여 크게 주목을 받지 못하였다. 그러나 근대국가의 동질성과 인간의 존엄성‧민주주의 등이 중대한 위기에 봉착하게 되면서 이러한 과제를 해결하기 위하여 모색된 국가모델이 문화국가이다. 문화국가는 문화주의 이념의 실현을 위하여 개인의 문화적 자유실현을 보장하고, 개인의 문화적 기본권실현을 보완하기 위하여 문화적 급부의무를 지는 국가로서 국가의 문화형성권은 개인의 문화적 자율성을 침해하지 않는 한에서 보충성의 원칙하에 행사되어야 한다. 한국헌법도 문화국가원리를 구현하고 있음은 의심의 여지가 없고, 또한 문화국가를 헌법이념으로 하는 문화국가원리는 헌법상의 기타 기본원리와 내적 통일성을 가지며 상호 보완관계에 있다고 할 수 있다. 특히 한국은 민족통일이라는 국가과제를 위하여 민족적 동질성의 확보와 국가의 계속성을 유지하기 위한 민족문화창달을 국가의무로 하고 있다. 따라서 문화국가원리는 민족문화창달 및 인간의 존엄과 가치실현‧민주주의이념의 보완이라는 기능을 가지며, 그 내용으로서 반전체주의국가성‧평화국가성‧복지국가성‧민주국가성이라는 정체성을 내재하고 있다. 그리고 문화국가원리를 구현하기 위한 문화급부 문화조성행정도 자율성 다원성 개방성‧중립성‧민주성이라는 문화국가원리에 내재하는 본질적 한계 내에서만 행사되어야 하며, 이러한 범위 내에서 문화국가원리는 규범성을 가진다.

      • 憲法上 民族國家의 規範的 性格

        류시조 부산 외국어 대학교 2004 外大論叢 Vol.28 No.-

        Korean constitution has been based on the principle of the Nation State. Korea as a nation state was composed of Korean Nation. Korean nation evolved out of natural nation in immemorial times into cultural nation and political nation. As cultural nation, Korean people has it,s own traditional and national culture. A national culture in Korea brought up Korean nationalism. And korean nationalism was developed from cultural nationalism to political nationalism. In the end, Korean nationalism contributed the foundation of Republic of Korea Government born of the March First Independence Movement of 1919. But after Independence Korea separated two state, south and north. And political nationalism in Korea was not completed yet. But nationalism in Korean Constitution was formed of the important principle of Constitution. In korean modern history, korean nationalism had contributed to the foundation of Korea and had became the national ideal envisioned on the founding of a country. So in the preamble of our constitution, constituion declare as following; We the people of Korea, proud of a resplendent history and traditions dating from time immemorial, upholding the cause of the Provisional Republic of Korea Government born of the March First Independence Movement of 1919 and the democratic ideals of the April Nineteenth Uprising of 1960 against injustice, having assumed the mission of democratic reform and peaceful unification of our homeland and having determined to consolidate national unity with Justice, humanitarianism and brotherly love. In spite of dispute on the character of nation state of Korean Constitution, We can not deny the nationalism in korean constitution and character of nation state. The principle of nation state of our korean constitution is a free democratic nation state. And the character of a free democratic nation state involve character of open nation state, peaceful nation state, cultural nation state.

      • KCI등재

        화사회와 자유권적 기본권

        류시조(Ryu, Si-Jo) 한국헌법학회 2010 憲法學硏究 Vol.16 No.2

        '스콜라' 이용 시 소속기관이 구독 중이 아닌 경우, 오후 4시부터 익일 오전 7시까지 원문보기가 가능합니다.

        다문화사회에 있어서 자유권적 기본권의 문제는 특히 사회문화적 약자라고 할 수 있는 문화적 소수자의 인권의 문제로서의 성격을 지니고 있다. 자유권은 보편적인 인간의 생래적 권리로서 국적을 불문하고 내외국민 모두에게 동등하게 보장되어야 함이 원칙이다. 특히 다문화사회를 구성하는 소수자인 국제결혼이주자ㆍ이주노동자 등은 사회적 문화적 약자로서 다문화공동체의 주요 구성원이므로 최소한 이들의 자유권의 보장이야 말로 이들의 문화적 정체성의 확립과 유지뿐만 아니라 사회적 통합과 정치적 안정을 위해서도 매우 중요하다. 따라서 이들의 국내 거주와 정착, 취업활동 등에 관한 규제와 제한은 국가안전보장 질서유지 공공복리에 의한 최소한에 그쳐야할 뿐만 아니라, 내국인과 동등한 수준의 기본권보장이야말로 다문화사회의 성립과 유지에 대단히 중요하다. 다문화사회는 단일문화체제인 민족국가를 넘어 한층 더 성숙된 민주국가 법치국가 문화국가 복지국가로 발전해 가기 위한 사회적 모델이라고 할 수 있다는 점에서 사회 문화적 소수자에 대한 사회권적 기본권정책에 앞서 우선적으로 보장되어야 할 것이 자유권적 기본권보장이다. 그리고 자유권적 기본권보장야말로 성공적인 다문화사회의 정착을 위한 불가결의 전제조건이라고 할 수 있다. Multiculturalism is argued to be a fundamental human right to maintain culture and heritage of human being, and this view is also enshrined in the UNESCO Universal Declarationon Cultural Diversity. Korean society has just entered into the multicultural society. The diversity of cultures in Korea is also often considered as social strength, a source of robustness and capacity. But the problems of civil rights in multicultural society is possessed of characters of problems of human rights of cultural minorities who is social cultural weak. The civil rights that is a inherent rights of human being should be guaranteed for all human kinds, local or not. An international marriage immigrant women and immigrant worker etc who consist multicultural society are social cultural weak. Though they are social minorities, they are also a staple members of multicultural community. Multiculturalism reflects existing diversity, immigration describes how societies and populations evolve in term of populations. Such evolution, in turn, often alters the cultural landscape and provides the basis for the multicultural state or society. Therefore the civil rights guarantee for each cultural subject is the very important not only for building and maintenance it's cultural identity, but also for social integration and political stabilization in multicultural society. Especially in order to the above purpose, regulations and limits on domestic dwelling and settlement, employment activity of marriage immigrant women and immigrant worker, etc should be kept to a minimum. And the fundamental right guarantee which is equal with the native also should be kept. The multiculturalism in Korea which is a monocultural national state, can be a new social ideology to form society for being developed into the more mature democratic cultural state. And the civil rights of social cultural minorities should be preferentially guaranteed before social fundamental rights of minorities

      맨 위로 스크롤 이동