• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.55
• /
• pp.5-32
• /
• 2011

This paper is a comparative analysis of constitutional decisions in which the Korea Consitutional Court and the United States Supreme Court applied the void for vagueness doctrine into free expression issues. Common aspects are: both courts applied the void for vagueness doctrine on the grounds that vague laws bring chilling effect on freedom of expression. Acknowledging inevitable uncertainties in lawmaking and legal jargons, however, both courts required minimum standards in the void for vagueness doctrine. In the cases where unclear legal meanings resulted in constitutional challenges, both courts adopted the "narrowing construction" by the courts or judges based on average/ordinary person's understanding. The biggest differences between the two constitutional courts are their approach to the degrees of vagueness allowed in free expression cases. The U.S. Supreme Court underscored the necessity of narrowly drawn, reasonable and definite standards. Meanwhile, the Korea Constitutional Court relaxed its standards in some cases such as the National Security Law cases, even though it admitted the possibility of curtailing the right to free expression. The Court reasoned that those laws, though vague, brought with bigger social interests and are necessary tools in dealing with changing world.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.11-34
• /
• 2014

Promulgation of the medical practice rule without specific definition in Medical Law has brought about many constitutional issues. The major issue is that the law has the government punish unlicensed medical practice without defining what it is. Instead, the law chooses a license-centered structure of criminal punishment for medical malpractice, saying "no one can practice medicine without the government-approved license." This regulation violates the rule of "void for vagueness" based on the principle of "nulla poena nullum crimen sine lege." Judicial interpretation should be required for a citizen to understand the Medical Law provision intuitively. In addition, the law infringes upon the freedom of occupation of the unlicensed and the licensed who wish to extend his or her practice area for "holistic medicine." The central issue of the law is that it was established under no ground of professionalism even though medical practice has been understood professional. The government has centrally controlled the medical field for its needs. Lastly, the current law violates the right of medical selection of the consumers of medicine. Because patients have the right of health and life, they have to hold the latitude of selection for medical treatments. Especially, they should have an opportunity for considering the Complementary and Alternative Medicine if they want. But under the current rules, this medicine is not permitted. To correct those problems, a new provision for the definition of medical practice should be adopted at once.

• International Journal of Advanced Culture Technology
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.7-12
• /
• 2019

Korea's laws regarding ICT must follow the Void for vagueness doctrine, the Principle of forbidden general delegation, the Principle of justification of system and the Principle of balancing test in the Constitution. The Act for the Promotion and Convergence and so on of Information and Communication in the Future should be improved as follows. It is desirable to improve the part where the principle of system justification of the Constitution is problematic in relation to existing laws. It is desirable to improve the ICT's policies on industry and convergence technologies so that they are well balanced between promotion and regulation of ICT's industries. It is desirable to improve the information service policy and legislative makeup relationship between various government agencies related to ICT. It is therefore desirable to improve the institutional complement to the post-regulatory framework for the protection of users of ICT in the future. It is desirable to create a device to replace the functions of the Information Service Budget Council in the special law of ICT.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.343-405
• /
• 2009

This paper is to discuss essential business of hospital business. While the labor world and ILO made continuous recommendation for improvements towards the compulsory arbitration system along with the controversy over unconstitutionality of the system, the Constitutional Court ruled that the system is constitutional on December 23, 1996(90hunba19) and on May 15, 2003 (2001hunga31). Despite this decision from the Constitutional Court, there has been much controversy over whether the compulsory arbitration system infringes the rights of collective action against the principle of trade union & labor relations adjustment which allows Commissioner of the Labor Relations Commission to decide on submission of arbitration by virtue of his/her authority in case where industrial disputes take place in the essential public-service businesses. The revision on the above provision was closely examined from the year 2003 and an agreement was made on the abolition of the compulsory arbitration system and the introduction of essential business with a grand compromise among labor unions, employers and the government on September 11, 2006 followed by revision(Essential business system enacted on January 1, 2008) of the Trade Union & Labor Relations Adjustment Act on December 30 in the same year. Accordingly, in order to perform the essential business, parties to labor relations must have an agreement or obtain a decision by the Labor Relations Commission before taking industrial actions. This paper firstly examined the concept of essential public-service businesses and essential business, legal meaning of essential business, procedures for making agreement and decision and legal effects. Secondly it intensively explored a theory against the principle of the legality which was raised from some part of society. In other words, it is claimed that a theory against the principle of the legality is not consistent with the rule of legislation and some abstract wording is against void for vagueness doctrine because part of crime constitution requirements is delegated to the Presidential Decree or to consultation among parties to labor relations. But analysis on the rule of legislation and void for vagueness doctrine reflected in the decision by the Constitutional Court led that argument for a theory against the principle of the legality is not reasonable. Close examination was done on a formal act of essential business agreement and necessity of prior agreement before submission of decision to the Labor Relations Commission which might have difficulties in performing work. In addition, an example agreement on hospital essential business is attached to help you understand this paper better.