한국에서 차별금지법 제정에 있어서 성적지향을 둘러싼 갈등과 전망 = Disputes and Perspectives on Sex Orientation in the Legislation of Anti-discrimination Law in Korea

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

International human-rights institutions have dealt with anti-discrimination as an important agenda to realize equality and prevent human-rights violation, and the obligation of comprehensive prohibition on discrimination has become a universal duty of advanced countries in the area of human rights. In particular, most of advanced countries in human rights adopt the anti-discrimination law which prohibits all sorts of discrimination. One of issues which are placed in the center of most fierce controversies and conflicts on the enactment of domestic anti-discrimination law in Korea is the prohibition on sex orientation-based discrimination. Sex orientation has been eliminated from the government bill for anti-discrimination law, and the standpoint that although sex orientation is not stipulated in the anti-discrimination law, discrimination can be prohibited for it is an exemplary rule, can cause the problem of neglecting and allowing discrimination in the practical application of the law. In other words, discrimination against sexual minorities who have been customarily and historically discriminated for a long time has become a daily routine and caged them in a closet. Therefore, the legislation of anti-discrimination law for sexual minorities whose sex orientation and sexual identity are different can be a starting point to protect their human rights and realize practical equality. The anti-discrimination law is not yet enacted in Korea for the present, but the National Human Rights Commission Act and so on prescribe prohibition on discrimination. However, the prohibition on discrimination by the National Human Rights Commission Act and so on has no legal binding force in reality, and only takes corrective action through advice, thus resulting in no practically effective prohibition on discrimination. On this account, the legislation of law that has a legal binding force in reality and with which discrimination can be effectively eliminated is urgent, and this law must stipulate sex orientation as well as main causes of prohibition on discrimination. In order for the anti-discrimination law to be enacted as a basic law for equal rights, it must be legislated as a comprehensive anti-discrimination law, and such a standpoint that the National Human Rights Commission Act and so on can exemplify the causes of prohibition on discrimination seems to overlook practical difficulties in the application of law. In this regard, the discrimination of which history is long and which is routinized in everyday life, such as sex orientation, must be stipulated with the reasons of prohibition on discrimination. In addition, in order to realize practical rights to equality, it is necessary to have the court take positive action to stop and correct discrimination, and a means to stop and correct discrimination practically must be established by stipulating the provision of punitive damage reimbursement. The legislation of anti-discrimination law encounters with the conflicts and resistance on sex orientation for the present and its enactment is uncertain. Religious standpoints of sex orientation can be different, but it is impossible to force others to adopt their religious beliefs. Furthermore, the attempt of changing the attitudes towards sex orientation through education can be discriminative behavior and violence against sexual minorities. Sexual minorities also have rights not to be discriminated. The standpoint of National Human Rights Commission for homosexuality is that it is only a sexual orientation an individual can make a choice freely. Now, it is time to realize practical equality for sexual minorities, and remove such discriminative activities against them as harassment and hatred, thus making them carry on normal life. In addition, it is necessary to guarantee sexual minorities equal rights to legislation as people of Korea, and rights to pursuit of human dignity, value and happiness must be realized for them. In order for the pr

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 한수웅, "헌법학" 법문사 2011

2 나영정, "한국의 LGBTI 인권현황 2013 - 성적지향, 성별정체성 법정책연구회 연간보고서" 성적지향·성별정체성 법정책연구회 2014

3 홍성수, "표현의 자유의 한계: 혐오발언 구제의 정당성과 방법" 표현의 자유를 위한 연대, 차별금지법 제정 연대 2013

4 이준일, "트랜스젠더(transgender)의 헌법적 문제" 법학연구원 (50) : 39-75, 2008

5 이준일, "차별없는 세상과 법 (차별금지법 제2판)" 弘文社 2012

6 이준일, "차별금지법의 제정필요성과 입법적 고려사항" 한국의회발전연구회 20 (20): 249-256, 2014

7 최승철, "차별금지법의 이해" 한울 2011

8 "차별금지법안 검토보고서" 국회 법제사법위원회 2013

9 "차별금지법안 검토보고서" 국회 법제사법위원회 2008

10 성소수자 차별반대 무지개행동, "지금 우리는 미래를 만들고 있습니다"

11 이준일, "섹슈얼리티와 법" 세창출판사 2009

12 김지혜, "성적지향에 대한 평등권 심사기준과 배제금지원칙 ― 미국 소수자 평등보호 법리의 한국적 함의 ―" 한국헌법학회 19 (19): 199-234, 2013

13 장서연, "성소수자의 법적 쟁점과 과제" 전남대학교 법학연구소 공익인권법센터 (4) : 2009

14 김현경, "성소수자에 대한 혐오표현, 그 옹호의 논리를 넘어서”: 표현의 자유론 비판과 시민권의 재구성" 서울대학교 법학연구소 공익인권법 센터와 서울대학교 인권법학회 (12) : 2012

15 Albie Sachs, "불루드레스, 법과 삶의 기묘한 연금술" 일월서각 2012

16 한가람, "범죄화와 시민권의 간극 – 군형법 제92조의 6과 성소수자 운동" 성적지향 성별정체성 법정책연구회 2014

17 신응철, "바라보기ㆍ해석하기를 너머 수용하기로서의 다문화 현상 - 동성애에 대한 기독교계의 찬ㆍ반 논쟁을 중심으로-" 중앙철학연구소 23 : 281-304, 2008

18 윤성호, "동성혼인에 대한 헌법적 고찰" 한국 국가법학회 9 (9): 2013

19 정호경, "국가인권위원회 진정제도에 관한 고찰 －행정소송, 행정심판, 심사청구 제도와의 비교를 중심으로－" 법학연구소 28 (28): 57-80, 2011

20 "http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/hrcouncil/docs/19session/A.HRC.19.41_English.pdf"

21 "http://www.government.se/content/1/c6/11/59/03/0e63b92f.pdf"

22 "http://www.do.se/en/About-the-Equality-Ombudsman-/"