• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.187-220
• /
• 2020

Today, administrative legislation is becoming more and more important in that it not only sets the legal life relationship of the people in great detail and detail, but is closely related to the occurrence, extinction, and alteration of rights and obligations held by prisoners. In the United States, the types of administrative legislation are divided into substantive and interpretative regulations, so-called substantive regulations, which give prior notice and opportunity to comment on interested parties through formal or informal administrative procedures in accordance with Article 553 of the Federal Administrative Procedures Act. On the other hand, the interpretation regulation, which is "the regulation established by the Administration for the simple interpretation of statutes," does not require prior notice or comment because it does not affect the people's rights obligations. The Azar v. Allina Health Service, 587 U.S. 1804, 2019 ruling by the U.S. Constitutional Court, subject to this research paper, is about a dispute over a new decision to require Medicare to determine the amount of compensation for care providers that provide medical services for the poor, and should the regulations be regarded as substantive under the Administrative Procedures Act and should not be given a hearing or a simple internal process for processing. Given that the current administrative procedure law of our country stipulates the procedures for administrative pre-announcement through Articles 42.1 and 44.1, but that our courts have not judged violations of legislative pre-announcement procedures under the Administrative Procedures Act so far as to judge the illegality of administrative legislation, the dispute of the U.S. Constitutional Court will provide new implications for controlling legal orders beyond simple legal interpretation and has great significance in terms of readjustment of relevant regulations under future administrative procedures.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.55
• /
• pp.57-94
• /
• 2018

Crisis of trust in Korean society, especially south-south conflicts among Korean political circle, civil society and peoples on the issue of the Korean peninsula policy driven by south Korean government, have weakened the sustainable and consistent energy of the policy for peace and unification of Korea peninsula. At the moment of drastic change of south-north relation in Korean peninsula, National agreement as a foundation of sustainable peace and unification policy has very important meaning. Because of this, national contract of unification as a kind of social concertation, has been demanded. National contract for peace and unification is an unprecedented process for making unofficial legal norm because it authorize quasi-legislative binding force on the agreement which is concluded by the Korean political circle, civil society and peoples for the peace and unification of Korean peninsula. National contract for peace and unification includes 'agreed aim and principles' for peace, prosperity and unification as well as process and result. And National contract for peace and unification, also is characterized long duration of aim achievement and openness of participating subjects. In terms of law, it will be legitimate source for comprehensive modification of international and internal law. In addition, The nature of National contract for peace and unification, as a people's law, should be considered as soft law which has the power to realize its contents through the enactment of legislation and policy. In order to guarantee the establishment and effectiveness of National contract for peace and unification, the setting of organization is need to determine the range of representatives, who participate in the process of contract making, procedure of contract and to carry out the contract after the conclusion of National contract for peace and unification. For the reason, the Council of National Contract for Peace and Unification as a independent administrative government committee and 'Act on National Contract for Peace and Unification' is needed.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.29-74
• /
• 2022

As social disasters occur under the Disaster Management Act, which can damage the people's "life, body, and property" due to the rapid spread and spread of unexpected COVID-19 infectious diseases in 2020, information collected through inspection and reporting of infectious disease pathogens (Article 11), epidemiological investigation (Article 18), epidemiological investigation for vaccination (Article 29), artificial technology, and prevention policy Decision), (3) It was used as an important basis for decision-making in the context of an infectious disease crisis, such as promoting vaccination and understanding the current status of damage. In addition, medical policy decisions using infectious disease data contribute to quarantine policy decisions, information provision, drug development, and research technology development, and interest in the legal scope and limitations of using infectious disease data has increased worldwide. The use of infectious disease data can be classified for the purpose of spreading and blocking infectious diseases, prevention, management, and treatment of infectious diseases, and the use of information will be more widely made in the context of an infectious disease crisis. In particular, as the serious stage of the Disaster Management Act continues, the processing of personal identification information and sensitive information becomes an important issue. Information on "medical records, vaccination drugs, vaccination, underlying diseases, health rankings, long-term care recognition grades, pregnancy, etc." needs to be interpreted. In the case of "prevention, management, and treatment of infectious diseases", it is difficult to clearly define the concept of medical practicesThe types of actions are judged based on "legislative purposes, academic principles, expertise, and social norms," but the balance of legal interests should be based on the need for data use in quarantine policies and urgent judgment in public health crises. Specifically, the speed and degree of transmission of infectious diseases in a crisis, whether the purpose can be achieved without processing sensitive information, whether it unfairly violates the interests of third parties or information subjects, and the effectiveness of introducing quarantine policies through processing sensitive information can be used as major evaluation factors. On the other hand, the collection, provision, and use of infectious disease data for research purposes will be used through pseudonym processing under the Personal Information Protection Act, consent under the Bioethics Act and deliberation by the Institutional Bioethics Committee, and data provision deliberation committee. Therefore, the use of research purposes is recognized as long as procedural validity is secured as it is reviewed by the pseudonym processing and data review committee, the consent of the information subject, and the institutional bioethics review committee. However, the burden on research managers should be reduced by clarifying the pseudonymization or anonymization procedures, the introduction or consent procedures of the comprehensive consent system and the opt-out system should be clearly prepared, and the procedure for re-identifying or securing security that may arise from technological development should be clearly defined.