Detailed Information

Cited 0 time in webofscience Cited 0 time in scopus
Metadata Downloads

이익형량에 대한 환원주의적인 접근의 사례: 미국의 단계심사와 한국의 과잉금지 원칙Reductionist Approach to Interest-Balancing: the Examples of American Multi-tiered Scrutiny and Korean Principle of Proportionality

Other Titles
Reductionist Approach to Interest-Balancing: the Examples of American Multi-tiered Scrutiny and Korean Principle of Proportionality
Authors
박경신
Issue Date
2008
Publisher
한국법철학회
Keywords
형량(balancing); 이익형량(interest-balancing); 맞춤(fit); 수단의 합목적성(means-ends fit); 밀착하여 재단된(narrowly tailored); 엄격심사(strict scrutiny); 중간심사(intermediate scrutiny); 비례성원칙(principle of proportionality); 이성적 근거 심사(rational basis review); 연동적 척도(sliding scale); 근본적 권리(fundamental right); 의심스러운 구분(suspect classification)
Citation
법철학연구, v.11, no.1, pp.165 - 196
Indexed
KCI
Journal Title
법철학연구
Volume
11
Number
1
Start Page
165
End Page
196
URI
https://scholar.korea.ac.kr/handle/2021.sw.korea/125141
ISSN
1226-8445
Abstract
This paper analyzes the American multi-tiered scrutiny used in constitutional review and compares to the Korean constitutional principle of proportionality. The multi-tiered scrutiny of a state action is conducted in a manner that, as the private interest infringed by that state action becomes greater, the greater the public interest the state action is required to accomplish. This relationship corresponds to one of the four elements of the Korean principle of proportionality, namely that of the balancing of interests. Also, the multi-tiered scrutiny requires a greater means-ends fit as the greater private interest is at stake. This requirement of a means-ends fit corresponds to the appropriateness of means and the least restrictive means, the two other elements of the principle of proportionality, and enhances the likelihood that the public interest outweighs the private interest infringed, thereby supplementing the ultimate test of balancing. The requirement that the public interest be at minimum legitimate to ‘important’ or ‘compelling’ also makes sure that the balancing is conducted with respect to a public good as opposed to a public harm. The idea that constitutionality of a state action can be determined by balancing faces a criticism that the quantification of essentially abstract qualities cannot be accomplished in a consistent or binding manner. However, the stare decisis principle provides a comparative scheme where previous decisions provide a binding and consistent rule by which the interest-balancing can produce concrete results.
Files in This Item
There are no files associated with this item.
Appears in
Collections
Graduate School > School of Law > 1. Journal Articles

qrcode

Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

Related Researcher

Researcher Park, Kyung sin photo

Park, Kyung sin
School of Law
Read more

Altmetrics

Total Views & Downloads

BROWSE