RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    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
    KCI등재

    사법작용의 기능과 한계 -체계이론의 관점에서- = The Functions and Limits of Judicial Action -From the perspective of systems theory-

    한글로보기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    “What functions can judicial action perform in a modern society?” and “What are the limits of judicial action?”. These two questions will be addressed in this article. To this end, the author quotes the perspectives of the systems theory established by a German sociologist Niklas Luhmann. Unlike the past when the judicial action was considered passive, the modern society requests much to judicial action under the name of ‘judicial activism’. In short, the modernsociety wants to resolve a wide range of social conflicts though the laws. However, there have been a lot of arguments until now on whether the legal system can actually resolve all social conflicts. Does the legal system, particularly, the judicial action have the functional competence to solve any and all problems with a modern society? To this question, the systems theory replies skeptically. According to the systems theory, the judicial action is not able to solve the problems with a modern society because of the ‘functional differentiation of modern society’ and the ‘operative closure of legal system’. The author intends to analyze on what grounds the systems theory has reached to this conclusion. To this end, the author intensively analyzes the ‘functional differentiation of modern society’ and ‘legal system as autopoietic system’. Of course, the author does not always agree with the arguments of systems theory. This is because the author argues that the judicial action performs more functions than what argued by the systems theory. It is not appropriate to request much to or have much expectations on the judicial action in the modern society wherein complexity increases surprisingly; be that as it may, it is also inappropriate to underestimate the functions of judicial action.
    번역하기

    “What functions can judicial action perform in a modern society?” and “What are the limits of judicial action?”. These two questions will be addressed in this article. To this end, the author quotes the perspectives of the systems theory estab...

    “What functions can judicial action perform in a modern society?” and “What are the limits of judicial action?”. These two questions will be addressed in this article. To this end, the author quotes the perspectives of the systems theory established by a German sociologist Niklas Luhmann. Unlike the past when the judicial action was considered passive, the modern society requests much to judicial action under the name of ‘judicial activism’. In short, the modernsociety wants to resolve a wide range of social conflicts though the laws. However, there have been a lot of arguments until now on whether the legal system can actually resolve all social conflicts. Does the legal system, particularly, the judicial action have the functional competence to solve any and all problems with a modern society? To this question, the systems theory replies skeptically. According to the systems theory, the judicial action is not able to solve the problems with a modern society because of the ‘functional differentiation of modern society’ and the ‘operative closure of legal system’. The author intends to analyze on what grounds the systems theory has reached to this conclusion. To this end, the author intensively analyzes the ‘functional differentiation of modern society’ and ‘legal system as autopoietic system’. Of course, the author does not always agree with the arguments of systems theory. This is because the author argues that the judicial action performs more functions than what argued by the systems theory. It is not appropriate to request much to or have much expectations on the judicial action in the modern society wherein complexity increases surprisingly; be that as it may, it is also inappropriate to underestimate the functions of judicial action.

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼