헌법재판과 헌법해석의 상호관계에 관한 연구

• 영문명: A Study on Interrelationship between Constitutional Adjudication and Constitutional Interpretation
• 발행기관: 한국헌법학회
• 저자명: 김형남(KIM HYUNG NAM)
• 간행물 정보: 『헌법학연구』憲法學硏究 第9卷 第2號, 245~271쪽, 전체 27쪽
• 주제분류: 법학 > 법학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2003.08.01

영문 초록

A long-standing dispute in constitutional theory has gone under different names at different times, but today's terminology seems as helpful as any. Today we are likely to call the contending sides "interpretivism" or "originalism" and "noninterprerivism" or "neutral principle"-the former indicating that judges deciding constitutional issues should confine themselves to enforcing norms that are stared or clearly implicit in the written Constitution, the latter the contrary view that courts should go beyond that set of references and enforce norms that cannot be discovered within the four cornets of the document. Since that methodology in constitutional interpretation has been used in judicial review or constitutional adjudication, many scholars thought that both of them are a same thing. Always constitutional interpretation wears a colorful suit, which means constiutional adjudication. So the central question of constitutional interpretation is the propet role of the courts and Korean Constitutional Court in our system ofngovernment. They have been so stressed for an crucial role to interpret constitution. Finally constitutional adjudication will be a dish, which contains food, that is, constitutional interpretation. We should look on such a side interrelation between them.

목차

Ⅰ. 처음에

Ⅱ. 헌법재판과 헌법해석

Ⅲ. 상호관계에 대한 분석

Ⅳ. 맺는 말

<참고문헌>

Abstract