개인구독
소속 기관이 없으신 경우, 개인 정기구독을 하시면 저렴하게
논문을 무제한 열람 이용할 수 있어요.
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.
조약의 사법심사 : 미국의 경우를 중심으로
Judicial Review of Treaty - Focused on U.S. Experience
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 충남대학교 법학연구소 법학연구 法學硏究 第20卷 第1號 KCI Accredited Journals
- 발행연도
- 2009.6
- 수록면
- 3 - 35 (33page)
이용수
조약의 사법심사 : 미국의 경우를 중심으로
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This article is to analyze legal issues on judicial review of treaty in U.S. and provide in depth and possible interpretation on judicial review of treaty in Korea. First, the concept, form, characteristics, effect, and termination of treaty is to be analyzed. Second, the general status and the legal issues about executive agreement in U.S. is to be reviewed. Third, judicial review of treaty which solves the current and potential problems on constitutional cases such as Free Trade Agreement between Korea and U.S. is to be reviewed.
There are several characteristics to represent judicial review of treaty in U.S. The form and method stipulated in Constitution is not the only way of a treaty. Nowadays, it is common to follow congressional executive agreement. The Supreme Court has recognized that two types of treaties exist. Treaties may be either non executing that is a ratified treaty requires implementing legislation before it takes effect as domestic law or self executing that is a ratified treaty, which takes effect as domestic law immediately upon ratification. The possibility of judicial review of treaty would be sometimes denied as foreign affairs or apolitical issues, otherwise it would be sometimes accepted because it is not required expertise and it is essentially meaningless without judicial enforcement.
We think it is difficult to accept flexible way to make treaties because we adopt strict interpretation to a written constitution and to form a single parliament system. It is also difficult to adopt dichotomy of executory or self executory treaty that is unique in U.S. It could be needed, however, to think whether later legislation obligations imposed on treaties or not. A little more in depth discussion for the Constitutional Court would be needed. Whether the possibility of judicial review of treaty or not, and if judicial review of treaty is possible, for the scope of judicial review, it is desirable to consider the understanding of the situation after treaty.
Today, treaty correlates guarantee of the individual rights. This research is expected to help development to identify judicial review of treaty and set up concrete rule of it.
There are several characteristics to represent judicial review of treaty in U.S. The form and method stipulated in Constitution is not the only way of a treaty. Nowadays, it is common to follow congressional executive agreement. The Supreme Court has recognized that two types of treaties exist. Treaties may be either non executing that is a ratified treaty requires implementing legislation before it takes effect as domestic law or self executing that is a ratified treaty, which takes effect as domestic law immediately upon ratification. The possibility of judicial review of treaty would be sometimes denied as foreign affairs or apolitical issues, otherwise it would be sometimes accepted because it is not required expertise and it is essentially meaningless without judicial enforcement.
We think it is difficult to accept flexible way to make treaties because we adopt strict interpretation to a written constitution and to form a single parliament system. It is also difficult to adopt dichotomy of executory or self executory treaty that is unique in U.S. It could be needed, however, to think whether later legislation obligations imposed on treaties or not. A little more in depth discussion for the Constitutional Court would be needed. Whether the possibility of judicial review of treaty or not, and if judicial review of treaty is possible, for the scope of judicial review, it is desirable to consider the understanding of the situation after treaty.
Today, treaty correlates guarantee of the individual rights. This research is expected to help development to identify judicial review of treaty and set up concrete rule of it.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 조약
Ⅲ. 행정협정
Ⅳ. 조약에 대한 사법심사
Ⅴ. 결론
참고문헌
〈ABSTRACT〉
참고문헌 (28)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
미국의 조약체결절차 및 이론에 관한 소고
법학논집
2004 .01
-
Korea's Tax Treaty Policy In The Light Of Treaty Shopping
조세연구
2004 .09
-
국내세법의 적용과 Treaty Override
조세학술논집
2006 .08
-
통상조약의 체결절차 및 이행에 관한 법률의 내용과 향후 개정방향에 대한 연구
한양법학
2015 .05
-
Treaty Shopping
조세학술논집
1995 .09
-
Treaty Shopping
조세법연구
1995 .08
-
The Treaty-Making Power in the United States
국제법학회논총
1963 .09
-
헌법상 조약체결권의 통제에 관한 일고찰 : 국회의 동의를 중심으로
미국헌법연구
2011 .04
-
美國의 Treaty Override에 관한 聯邦大法院 主要 判決의 分析
조세학술논집
2006 .02
-
Law and Practice of Investment Treaties, 2009
국제경제법연구
2010 .05
-
개헌시 국회동의 대상조약 항목의 재검토
국제법학회논총
2017 .06
-
조약의 국내법상 지위와 고시류조약
서울국제법연구
2015 .06
-
한국병합관련조약의 효력과 국가 대표의 매수
서울국제법연구
2010 .12
-
유럽연합의 제도적 개혁과 주요 쟁점 : 유럽헌법조약과 리스본조약을 중심으로
국제정치연구
2009 .06
-
1910년 한․일강제 병탄조약의 불법성, 무효성의 고찰
외법논집
2010 .01
-
조약의 체결·비준에 대한 국회의 동의권에 관한 비교법적 고찰 : 한일정보보호협정을 중심으로
미국헌법연구
2012 .08
-
국제투자분쟁에서 중재판정시 투자조약의 해석과 적용에 관한 연구
무역상무연구
2013 .08
-
유럽헌법조약의 비준 실패와 리스본조약의 의의
국제학논총
2008 .02
-
조세조약의 적용에 관한 소고 : 역외투자회사의 경우
조세학술논집
2006 .02
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
첫번째 댓글을 남겨주세요.
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-360-003240039