作为合宪性审查标准的宪法第22条第2款的含义和内容

I. Kang
{"title":"作为合宪性审查标准的宪法第22条第2款的含义和内容","authors":"I. Kang","doi":"10.30582/kdps.2023.36.2.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution stipulates that “the rights of authors, inventors, scientists, and artists are protected by law”. Despite being a provision that has continued since the Constitution's establishment, there has not been enough discussion in the constitutional academic community regarding its normative meaning and function, relationship with other fundamental rights, especially property rights, and concrete criteria for constitutionality review. Recently, in a case in which the Court reviewed the constitutionality of Article 9 of the Copyright Act, Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution was applied. As a result of this decision, discussions on the normative meaning of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution and its standard for constitutionality review were triggered in the constitutional law academia. These discussions are mostly related to whether Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution has a unique meaning and performs an independent function, its normative meaning, and the concrete standard for constitutionality review. However, many ambiguous aspects remain. Therefore, this article examines the normative contents of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution. The composition of this article is as follows. First, as a starting point, the meaning and limitations of the decision of the Court are examined. Second, by examining the US Supreme Court's doctrine about the copyrights clause and related discussions, this article seeks applicability of it to the interpretation of the Korean Constitution. Third, based on this, it critically reviews the recent discussions in constitutional law academia and offers the contents of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution as a standard for constitutionality review.","PeriodicalId":350441,"journal":{"name":"Korea Copyright Commission","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Meaning and Content of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution as a Standard for Constitutionality Review\",\"authors\":\"I. Kang\",\"doi\":\"10.30582/kdps.2023.36.2.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution stipulates that “the rights of authors, inventors, scientists, and artists are protected by law”. Despite being a provision that has continued since the Constitution's establishment, there has not been enough discussion in the constitutional academic community regarding its normative meaning and function, relationship with other fundamental rights, especially property rights, and concrete criteria for constitutionality review. Recently, in a case in which the Court reviewed the constitutionality of Article 9 of the Copyright Act, Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution was applied. As a result of this decision, discussions on the normative meaning of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution and its standard for constitutionality review were triggered in the constitutional law academia. These discussions are mostly related to whether Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution has a unique meaning and performs an independent function, its normative meaning, and the concrete standard for constitutionality review. However, many ambiguous aspects remain. Therefore, this article examines the normative contents of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution. The composition of this article is as follows. First, as a starting point, the meaning and limitations of the decision of the Court are examined. Second, by examining the US Supreme Court's doctrine about the copyrights clause and related discussions, this article seeks applicability of it to the interpretation of the Korean Constitution. Third, based on this, it critically reviews the recent discussions in constitutional law academia and offers the contents of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution as a standard for constitutionality review.\",\"PeriodicalId\":350441,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Korea Copyright Commission\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Korea Copyright Commission\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30582/kdps.2023.36.2.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Korea Copyright Commission","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30582/kdps.2023.36.2.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

《宪法》第22条第2款规定“作家、发明家、科学家和艺术家的权利受法律保护”。尽管这一条款自《宪法》制定以来一直延续至今,但宪法学界对其规范意义和功能、与其他基本权利特别是财产权的关系以及具体的合宪性审查标准等问题的讨论并不充分。最近,在法院对《著作权法》第9条是否符合宪法进行审查的案件中,适用了《宪法》第22条第2项。这一决定引发了宪法学界对宪法第22条第2款的规范意义及其合宪性审查标准的讨论。这些讨论主要涉及宪法第22条第2款是否具有独特的意义和独立的功能,其规范性意义,以及合宪性审查的具体标准。然而,仍然存在许多不明确的方面。因此,本文对宪法第22条第2款的规范性内容进行了考察。这篇文章的组成如下。首先,作为起点,对法院判决的意义和限制进行了审查。其次,本文通过考察美国最高法院关于版权条款的原则及其相关讨论,寻求其对韩国宪法解释的适用性。第三,在此基础上,批判性地回顾了最近宪法学学界的讨论,并将《宪法》第22条第2款的内容作为合宪性审查的标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Meaning and Content of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution as a Standard for Constitutionality Review
Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution stipulates that “the rights of authors, inventors, scientists, and artists are protected by law”. Despite being a provision that has continued since the Constitution's establishment, there has not been enough discussion in the constitutional academic community regarding its normative meaning and function, relationship with other fundamental rights, especially property rights, and concrete criteria for constitutionality review. Recently, in a case in which the Court reviewed the constitutionality of Article 9 of the Copyright Act, Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution was applied. As a result of this decision, discussions on the normative meaning of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution and its standard for constitutionality review were triggered in the constitutional law academia. These discussions are mostly related to whether Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution has a unique meaning and performs an independent function, its normative meaning, and the concrete standard for constitutionality review. However, many ambiguous aspects remain. Therefore, this article examines the normative contents of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution. The composition of this article is as follows. First, as a starting point, the meaning and limitations of the decision of the Court are examined. Second, by examining the US Supreme Court's doctrine about the copyrights clause and related discussions, this article seeks applicability of it to the interpretation of the Korean Constitution. Third, based on this, it critically reviews the recent discussions in constitutional law academia and offers the contents of Article 22, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution as a standard for constitutionality review.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信