지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Korean penalty surcharge (administrative surcharge) system attaches primary importance to realization of administrtive purpose, namely attainment of practical result of administrative disposition. There are traditionally two methods for securing perfomance of administrtive law duties in Korean Administrative Law. One method is administrtive compulsory execution against the non-perfomer of an obligation imposed by administrtive Act and subordinate statute or dispositon. The other is administrtive punishment against the violator of an administrtive obligation. Administrtive criminal punishment and administrtive disciplinary penalties are in the category of the latter.
But those traditionally methods are insufficient to secure the achievment of diverse administrtive purpose in modern administration. As a result of this situation, there are several fairly new methods for securing perfomance of administrtive law duty in Korea. One of them is the penalty surcharge (administrative surcharge) system.
It is well known that the introduction of penalty surcharge system in Korea was included in Monopoy Regulation and Fair Trade Act. As a result of this, penalty surcharge is originally interwovened with the economic law or the deprivation of undue profit. But owing to utility of the penalty surcharge system in modern administration, is the penalty surcharge introduced in the several fairly separate administrative Acts, besides is legal character of the penalty surcharge diversified.
Therefore is imprortant for discussion of penalty surcharge system that the aim and object of the separate administrative introduced penalty surcharge system is correct understood.
Telecommunications service is typically characterized by public interest. Therefore for correct comprehension of the penalty surcharge system introduced in Telecommuncation Business Act is inevitable substantial consideration for the public interest pursued by Telecommuncation Business Act.
In conclusion, the purpose and substance of the penalty Surcharge of Telecommunications Business Act is more than simple deprivation of undue profit and past-oriented sanction, pursuits future-oriented sanction for protection of public interest.
But those traditionally methods are insufficient to secure the achievment of diverse administrtive purpose in modern administration. As a result of this situation, there are several fairly new methods for securing perfomance of administrtive law duty in Korea. One of them is the penalty surcharge (administrative surcharge) system.
It is well known that the introduction of penalty surcharge system in Korea was included in Monopoy Regulation and Fair Trade Act. As a result of this, penalty surcharge is originally interwovened with the economic law or the deprivation of undue profit. But owing to utility of the penalty surcharge system in modern administration, is the penalty surcharge introduced in the several fairly separate administrative Acts, besides is legal character of the penalty surcharge diversified.
Therefore is imprortant for discussion of penalty surcharge system that the aim and object of the separate administrative introduced penalty surcharge system is correct understood.
Telecommunications service is typically characterized by public interest. Therefore for correct comprehension of the penalty surcharge system introduced in Telecommuncation Business Act is inevitable substantial consideration for the public interest pursued by Telecommuncation Business Act.
In conclusion, the purpose and substance of the penalty Surcharge of Telecommunications Business Act is more than simple deprivation of undue profit and past-oriented sanction, pursuits future-oriented sanction for protection of public interest.
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가는 말
Ⅱ. 과징금제도 일반론
Ⅲ. 전기통신사업법상의 과징금 제도
Ⅳ. 맺는 말
참고문헌
[Abstract]
참고문헌 (23)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
독점규제법상 과징금의 법적성격과 부과기준에 관한 연구
경영법률
2005 .01
-
전기통신사업법상 과징금 관련 법체계 개선방안
성신법학
2010 .02
-
부당한 공동행위의 행정제재수단으로써 과징금제도의 쟁점과 과제 - 건설입찰담합행위를 중심으로 -
공공사회연구
2019 .05
-
통신위원회의 심결사례를 통해 본 과징금 부과요인
사회과학연구
2006 .08
-
공정거래법상 과징금제도의 개선방안에 관한 연구
사회과학연구
2010 .02
-
기업에 대한 제재수단의 문제점과 개선방안
경영법률
2008 .01
-
미국의 중가산세 제도에 관한 고찰 : Fraud Penalty 관련 판례를 중심으로
한양법학
2014 .02
-
형사벌ㆍ행정형벌과 과태료 부과기준 및 산업안전보건법상 처벌규정의 적정성 검토
강원법학
2011 .10
-
분할가격정책에서 부가가격의 개수와 합리성이 구매의도에 미치는 영향
Asia-Pacific Journal of Business & Commerce
2013 .08
-
독점금지법상의 형사제재
法學論文集
2011 .01
-
사형제도의 개선방안
법학연구
2005 .11
-
中国死刑发展方向 - 以中日死刑比较为视角 -
원광법학
2016 .01
-
교정과 피해자관점에서 본 사형제도에 관한 고찰
한양법학
2009 .02
-
동북아시아 3국의 사형제도에 대한 비교 고찰 -정치·사회·문화적 측면을 중심으로-
원광법학
2008 .01
-
罰金刑의 改善方案
비교형사법연구
2004 .01
-
게임산업법상의 과징금제도에 관한 법정책적 고찰
법과 정책연구
2017 .01
-
사형폐지론의 입장에서 바라본 사형제도
한양법학
2010 .05
-
공정거래법상의“거래상 지위남용”규정 위반 사례에 대한 통계적 분석
규제연구
2004 .12
-
행정질서벌에 대한 再考
원광법학
2009 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0