DAU Library

학위논문 동서

大法院規則制定權의 比較憲法的 考察

권기우

부산 : 東亞大學校 1990.

ii,65장 ; 26cm.

학위논문(석사) : 東亞大學校 大學院 : 法學科, `90.

영문초록 : 1. Article 108 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea reads: "The Supreme Court as long as it keeps the law concerned, is vested with the power to establish the rules of the procedure of suit the internal discipline of the courts and the administration of judicial affairs." This regulation, which is not found in any continental constitutions, has existed in our system since the establishment of the Constitution. There are two opposing opinions about approving the rule-establishing power of the Supreme Court However, this controversy should be carried on considering that the rule-making power of the Supreme Court should be, for various grounds, an exception to the principle that all the laws must be established by the National Congress. Almost no research has been made on the topic of the rule-making power of the Supreme Court. In addition, the rule of the Supreme Court was subjected to the Constitutional Court on December 15, 1990. In this respect the main purpose of this study is to show the right direction of the Supreme Court's rule-making system by revealing how it came to be introduced into Korea and where it stands in our Constitution. 2. We will discuss why the rule-making system has been developed in England, whether it is a judicial right or a legislative one, and what the purpose of the system is. 3. We well examine the history and the present situation of the system in England, and those countries such as the U.S.A., Japan, and others which have been greatly affected. 4. Filially, we well discuss how the system has been developed in Korea, especially after the 3rd Republic, and will compare it with legislative right. Here, an examination is made in two points of the Constitutional Court's decision of October 15, 1990 concerning the rules of judicial affairs. And some directions of the system are suggested as a conclusion. It is my belief that the judicatures own efforts should be made and the reconsideration of the rule-making organization of the Supreme Court is needed.

바로가기