http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
정영훈 고조선단군학회 2003 고조선단군학 Vol.8 No.-
Dangun Nationalism in Pre-Modern Period of Korea
정영훈 고조선단군학회 2005 고조선단군학 Vol.13 No.-
The idea of Global Korean Community is raising with the belief that the globally dispersed Korean people must be unified and seek the common benefit and prosperity. It is being watched especially as a strategy of national survival and development in the age of globalization and borderless struggles. This article discusses the idea of Global Korean Community on the aspect of the integration movements of Korean people. In Korean history the integration movements were developed for 3 phases. The first phase were began with Silla's unification of Samkuk, and through this first movement Korean people developed into pre-modern nation. The second phase was the greate family integration theory in the late Joseon period and under Japanese rule period, which ceased the class consciousness and molded the modern nation. The third phase were the right-left wing integration movement to build the unified nation state in 1920~48. The movement of Global Korean Community is the 4th. integration movement in Korean history. It is rising now under the conditions of post-cold war, globalization and informatization period. And Korean's welfare and prosperity will greatly depend on the success and failure of this movement.
공항 구금 난민신청인의 헌법상 변호인조력권 인정 및 보장 방안 - 헌재 2018. 5. 31. 2014헌마346 결정을 중심으로 -
정영훈 대한변호사협회 2021 人權과 正義 : 大韓辯護士協會誌 Vol.- No.499
The target decision was seen as a violation of the right to help a lawyer under Article 12 (4) of the Constitution for refugee applicants who were housed in the airport’s waiting room for repatriation. On that basis, the court considered the legal nature of accepting airport repatriation waiting rooms as administrative detention and ruled that administrative detention is also included in the arrest of the right to support lawyers under Article 12 (4) of the Constitution. And it was determined tha the refusal to apply for an interview with a lawyer in this case had no legal basis and violated the proportional principle, which is the principle of limiting basic rights. South Korea, which implemented the Refugee Act for the first time in Asia, has a 1.1 percent refugee recognition rate in 2020, which is embarrassingly low compared to the refugee recognition rate in advanced European countries. As shown by the Yemeni refugee crisis in Jeju Island, hatred and prejudice against refugees are deeply in the consciousness of many people. In this situation, the decision to recognize the right of refugee applicants to assist lawyers in the airport’s repatriation waiting room as a constitutional basic right can be evaluated as a very meaningful judgment in protecting refugees’ human rights. Now, it is necessary to implement the right to assist lawyers, which is the basic constitutional right of applicants for refugee detention at airports, in the relevant laws, including the Refugee Act. In order to guarantee the right to assist lawyers of refugee applicants in airport detention, the right to assist lawyers of airport refugee applicants who have been denied refugee recognition screening should be explicitly stipulated in the Refugee Act. The ministry should establish a mandatory regulation to notify refugee officials of their right to help lawyers, while establishing an organic cooperation system with refugee law support organizations to connect refugee applicants with public interest lawyers. The litigation structure system should be expanded to allow refugee applicants to receive help from lawyers from the application stage or to receive help from public defenders only in certain procedures through legislation. In addition, it is necessary to simplify lawyers’ access to the airport and secure independent interview sites, ensure lawyers’ right to participate in refugee interviews and state their opinions, and secure and assist sufficiently an interpreter specializing in refugees, but above all, a fundamental change in perception of refugees is needed. 대상 결정은 이 사건 변호인 접견신청의 거부는 공항 송환대기실 수용 난민신청인의 헌법 제12조 제4항 본문의 변호인조력권을 침해한 것으로 보았다. 법정의견은 공항 송환대기실 수용의 법적 성격을 ‘행정구금’으로 보고 ‘행정구금’의 경우도 헌법 제12조 제4항 본문의 변호인조력권이 적용되는 ‘구속’에 포함된다고 판시하였다. 그리고 이 사건 변호인 접견신청의 거부는 어떠한 법률적 근거도 없고 기본권 제한의 원칙인 비례원칙도 위반한 것으로 판단하였다. 아시아 최초로 난민법을 시행한 대한민국이지만 2020년 난민인정률은 1.1%로 유럽선진국의 난민인정률에 비해 부끄러울 정도로 턱없이 낮다. 제주도 예맨 난민사태에서 알 수 있듯이 난민에 대한 혐오와 편견이 다수의 국민들 의식 속에 깊숙이 자리잡고 있다. 이러한 상황에서 공항 송환대기실에 수용된 난민신청인의 변호인조력권을 헌법상의 기본권으로 인정한 대상 결정은 난민의 인권보호에 매우 의미있는 판결이라 평가할 수 있다. 이제는 공항 구금 난민신청인의 헌법상 기본권인 변호인조력권을 난민법 등 관련 법률에 실질적으로 구현해야 한다. 공항 구금 난민신청인의 변호인조력권을 보장하기 위해서는 난민인정심사불회부 결정을 받은 난민신청인의 변호인조력권을 난민법 등에 명시적으로 규정해야 한다. 난민담당공무원에게 난민신청인의 변호인조력권을 고지하도록 하는 의무규정을 신설하고 법무부는 난민신청인과 공익변호사를 연결해 줄 수 있도록 난민법률지원 단체와 유기적 협력체계를 구축해야 할 것이다. 소송구조제도를 확대하여 난민신청인이 신청단계에서부터 변호사의 도움을 받을 수 있도록 하거나 입법을 통해 일부 절차에 한해서라도 국선변호인의 조력을 받을 수 있도록 해야 할 것이다. 그 외에 변호인의 공항 출입간소화 및 독립된 접견 장소 확보, 변호사의 난민면접심사 참여 및 의견진술권 보장, 난민전문통역인의 충분한 확보와 조력 등이 필요하지만 무엇보다 난민에 대한 근본적인 인식 전환이 필요하다고 할 것이다.