초록 close

The Supreme Court has continuously denied legally binding effect of civil penalty schedules which are parts of the Minister's Decree and which are enacted by the Minister under the delegation of the statute, while it has recognized legally binding effect of civil penalty schedules which are parts of the Presidential Decree under the same condition. These case law of the Supreme Court has been criticized by administrative law academics to be illogical and unconstitutional. Because the Constitution empowers both of the President and the Ministers to enact administrative decrees under the specific statutory delegation of the Congress, there is no legal and logical reason to treat therm differently. According to the first decision(Supreme Court Decision en banc, 2003 Du 1684 pronounced on 22. 6. 2006) which reveals clear reasoning behind the case law, the schedule in the Minister's Decree had adopted so mechanically-applicable rules that there is no discretion on the courts to give remedy in case where the application of the rule yields unjust results. So the main motivation of the Court to deny legally binding effect to Minister's Decree can be said to ensure room for judicial discretion to deviate from the administrative legislation. The one concurrent opinion of the above decision implied the possible change of the case law about the Minister's Decree. But if such a change implies that the Minister's Decree has a strict binding effect and the Court loses judicial discretion to make a decision different from the administrative legislation, it might have bad effect to restrict judicial discretion improperly. We expect legal norm to have flexibility for individual justice as well as general equality and foreseeability at the same time. And the legal effect of law consists of the various levels and types: on one hand, constitutional validity, enforceability, legitimacy and the other hand, rule, rule with excuse, factors, guideline, standard, principles, analogy etc. And the legal effect can also be different depending on the recipients of the norm. Therefore, the legal effect can be more properly reconstructed, not in the form of binding or non-binding rule, but in the form of more various and flexible forms. It enables the court to approach to administrative legislation in a more practical way.