원고적격(原告適格)의 정치경제학 - 한일 양국의 행정(사건)소송법 개정안에 대한 비교,분석을 중심으로 -

Abstract

Korea and Japan have recently made efforts to reform each of their

administrative litigation system by drafting amendments to each country's

Administrative Litigation Act. Although constitutional provisions and court

precedents in both countries are similar to each other, they have come up with

their respective amendments that are different from one another. The Korean

Supreme Court's amendment to the Administrative Litigation Act expands the

scope of an individual's standing to file an administrative lawsuit. This in effect

provides an interest party with a tool to affect the legality of an administrative

activity. On the contrary, Japan amended its Administrative Litigation Act, but

has preserved its original structure of standing, thereby addressing administrative

lawsuits as subjective lawsuits.

Many perspectives can be considered in examining divergent legal reforms in

the two countries. The cultural approach that focuses on the differences in

culture of the two countries in analyzing the causes is useful in looking at the

big picture, but it fails to provide pertinent information necessary to devise a

detailed reform plan. In contrast, a political economic analysis centers its

attention upon the political structure that has brought about the difference

between Korea and Japan. Focusing on the political structure enables one to

examine what concrete institutional factors and what political participants'

interactions have resulted in divergence between the two countries. Hence, such

analysis builds a foundation necessary to devise a detailed and remedial plan.