메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국비교공법학회 공법학연구 공법학연구 제8권 제2호
발행연도
2007.5
수록면
37 - 66 (30page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The aim of this article is to analyze and evaluate the judicial reform effort in the President Roh Moo-Hyun's government of Korean Republic between the years of 2003-6. The author depends upon a kind of theoretical tradition named 'apolitical politics', which is a mixture of at least two different strands in the study of legal profession; 'lawyer supply control theory' and 'lawyer's politics theory'. According to the author's analysis, the judicial reform effort in those years was under the leadership executed by an alliance of the legal service supplier groups like judges, prosecutors, attorneys and, to some extent, law professors. In that sense the special committees for judicial reform in Roh Moo-Hyun's government were the legal service supplier's committees as well. Among those supplier groups, the judges, especially the Supreme Court of Korea has led the whole process with a well-organized political strategy for keeping the collective interest of the legal service suppliers. The Supreme Court wanted to detour the normal process of legislation which was to go directly to the Korea National Assembly. She intentionally took a different way of making special committees under her own leadership. In pursuing the judicial reform agendas like (1) Graduate Law School System (2) Jury Trial in Criminal Procedure (3) Reorganization of the High Court etc, the Supreme Court wanted to increase the demand of legal service as much as possible and to keep the power of control on the lawyer supply mechanism as long as possible. But the real goal of the Supreme Court was surely to ensure the supremacy of court and judges in the judicial process. The apolitical politics done by the Supreme Court was so successful that the special committees were able to have a kind of consensus in the Korean legal profession on the judicial reform agendas. However, just after the suppler's consensus was made, the limit of the Legal Service Suppliers' Committee was revealed. Even though a number of the bills of judicial reform were presented, the legislative branch occupied by the lawyer-politicians did not function as effectively as the Supreme Court had expected. Korean National Assembly has been doing nothing about the bills of judicial reform for more than two years until the April of 2007.

목차

1. 법률가공급통제와 법률가정치
2. 파티(party)의 주인은 누구였는가?
3. ‘강한 사법’의 주도권 문제
4. 비(非)정치적 법률가정치의 함정
5. 사법개혁자 없는 사법개혁의 빈곤
〈Abstract〉

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-362-016142929