Korean Constitutional Court Act provides that Any person who claims that his basic right which is guaranteed by the Constitution has been violated by an exercise or non-exercise of governmental power may file a constitutional complaint, ex...

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A76487468
2007
-
360
KCI등재
학술저널
127-165(39쪽)
6
0
상세조회0
다운로드다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)
Korean Constitutional Court Act provides that Any person who claims that his basic right which is guaranteed by the Constitution has been violated by an exercise or non-exercise of governmental power may file a constitutional complaint, ex...
Korean Constitutional Court Act provides that Any person who claims that his basic right which is guaranteed by the Constitution has been violated by an exercise or non-exercise of governmental power may file a constitutional complaint, except the judgements of the ordinary courts, with the Constitutional Court""(Article 68①). So constitutional complaint against omission of administrative power could be filed.<BR> By the way, the Constitutional Court declared Administrative omission can be subject matters of constitutional complaints only when the administrative agency should be under an obligation derived from the Constitution to do specific action and it is clear through constitutional interpretation that the government is obligated to do specific action for the protection of basic rights. Therefore if the constitutional complaint could not be met the required conditions, it may be dismissed by the Constitutional Court.<BR> However all the state organs should guarantee that the fundamental human rights be secured from all danger(Article 10 of the Korean Constitution). It is under the legal duty to provide the victim whose basic rights have been violated by administrative omission with effective remedies, and to take preventive measures to keep all citizens safe. Accordingly I think the Constitutional Court should change the opinion about demanding the limited conditions to the constitutional complaint against administrative omissions.
과학기술의 발달과 기본권 해석의 재조명 - 사법부의 역할과 기능을 중심으로
기본권구제수단으로서의 법령소원에 있어서 보충성원칙의 재검토
비례대표선거와 초과의석 - 초과의석의 헌법적 문제점과 도입가능성을 중심으로
학술지 이력
| 연월일 | 이력구분 | 이력상세 | 등재구분 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 평가 | 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증) | |
| 2020-01-01 | 등재 | 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) | ![]() |
| 2017-01-01 | 등재 | 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) | ![]() |
| 2013-01-01 | 등재 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | ![]() |
| 2010-01-01 | 등재 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | ![]() |
| 2007-01-01 | 등재 | 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) | ![]() |
| 2006-01-01 | 등재 | 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) | ![]() |
| 2005-01-01 | 등재 | 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보1차) | ![]() |
| 2004-01-01 | 등재 | 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보1차) | ![]() |
| 2003-01-01 | 등재 | 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) | ![]() |
학술지 인용정보
| 기준연도 | WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) | KCIF(2년) | KCIF(3년) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 1.02 | 1.02 | 0.87 |
| KCIF(4년) | KCIF(5년) | 중심성지수(3년) | 즉시성지수 |
| 0.89 | 0.87 | 0.967 | 0.5 |