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

    법치행정의 확립을 위한 행정법의 과제 : 법학전문대학원 설치인가관련 판결의 행정법적 검토 (제척사유의 해석 및 위임입법권과 재량권의 한계, 사정판결의 판단기준) -대법원 2009.12.10선고 2009두8359판결 및 2009.12.10.선고 2009두14606 판결을 중심으로1- = A Study on the Supreme Court`s Decisions related to Permission of Law School(Application of Expulsive Cause in Competitors` Litigation, Decisional Criteria of Public Welfare in the Judicial Decision after Due Consideration of Circumstances(Sajeungpangeyul

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A82402140

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    I explore on the problem of standing, interpretation of expulsive cause in the competitors` litigation and decisional criteria of public welfare in judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances(sajeungpangeyul) in this article. I evaluated the Supreme Court`s two decisions of permit- refusal of law school. In theses cases the Supreme Court has interpreted and applied art.13 and art.10 of Law school Act of expulsive cause very formally. The Supreme Court held that defendant`s administrative disposition(action) is not invalid but revocable. I think that the defendant`s action is capable of invalidity because of unconstitutionality (disposition based on unconstitutional legislation of art. 5 of law school act`s enforcement ordinance) and illegality by misapplication of above-mentioned Act. It has to be corrected in another cases in the near future. Our Administrative Litigation Act has provided on judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances at Article 28. The notion of `public welfare` which is the requirement of judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances is uncertain, abstract, vague and comprehensive. So the judiciary hasn`t defined it directly but has explained it indirectly in lots of separate cases. Therefore the judiciary is possible to interpret and apply it arbitrarily to a case. It is needed to establish reasonable and concrete criteria to apply public welfare to a case. In these cases I think judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances is inevitable for stable establishment of new law school system in these cases. But I guess we have been discovered some adverse effects of the system of judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances. Finally We have discovered some adverse effects of the system of judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances(sajeungpangeyul). For that reason it has to be gradually disappeared by utilizing alternatives as like temporary litigation system and preventing each case from accumulation of facts over the illegal administrative actions. In conclusion, according to above-mentioned reasons I think the Supreme Court`s two law school-related decisions are not proper. So it should be corrected later in other similar cases.
    번역하기

    I explore on the problem of standing, interpretation of expulsive cause in the competitors` litigation and decisional criteria of public welfare in judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances(sajeungpangeyul) in this article. I evaluate...

    I explore on the problem of standing, interpretation of expulsive cause in the competitors` litigation and decisional criteria of public welfare in judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances(sajeungpangeyul) in this article. I evaluated the Supreme Court`s two decisions of permit- refusal of law school. In theses cases the Supreme Court has interpreted and applied art.13 and art.10 of Law school Act of expulsive cause very formally. The Supreme Court held that defendant`s administrative disposition(action) is not invalid but revocable. I think that the defendant`s action is capable of invalidity because of unconstitutionality (disposition based on unconstitutional legislation of art. 5 of law school act`s enforcement ordinance) and illegality by misapplication of above-mentioned Act. It has to be corrected in another cases in the near future. Our Administrative Litigation Act has provided on judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances at Article 28. The notion of `public welfare` which is the requirement of judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances is uncertain, abstract, vague and comprehensive. So the judiciary hasn`t defined it directly but has explained it indirectly in lots of separate cases. Therefore the judiciary is possible to interpret and apply it arbitrarily to a case. It is needed to establish reasonable and concrete criteria to apply public welfare to a case. In these cases I think judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances is inevitable for stable establishment of new law school system in these cases. But I guess we have been discovered some adverse effects of the system of judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances. Finally We have discovered some adverse effects of the system of judicial decision after due consideration of circumstances(sajeungpangeyul). For that reason it has to be gradually disappeared by utilizing alternatives as like temporary litigation system and preventing each case from accumulation of facts over the illegal administrative actions. In conclusion, according to above-mentioned reasons I think the Supreme Court`s two law school-related decisions are not proper. So it should be corrected later in other similar cases.

    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