法律文本的空白与解释的补充——以《宪法》第二十三条对产权的规定与解释为中心

Sang-sik Son
{"title":"法律文本的空白与解释的补充——以《宪法》第二十三条对产权的规定与解释为中心","authors":"Sang-sik Son","doi":"10.58555/li.2022.2.57","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Constitution stipulates “The property rights of all citizens are guaranteed. The content and limitations are determined by law.” in Article 23 Paragraph 1, and paragraph 2 stipulates the constitutional limitations of property rights by stipulating that “the exercise of property rights should be suitable for public welfare.” And paragraph 3 stipulates that “the expropriation, use, or restriction of property rights due to public necessity and compensation thereof shall be made by law, but legitimate compensation shall be paid.” The separation theory excludes unconstitutional infringement of property rights and guarantees the existence of specific property rights of the subject of fundamental rights. In the case of excessive restrictions beyond social restrictions, according to the separation theory, it is not understood as the expropriation of Article 23 (3) of the Constitution, and various measures (relaxation measures) to alleviate the excessive burden will be considered first. The basic structure of property rights can be divided into 'content regulations without compensation obligations', 'content regulations with (coordinated) compensation obligations', and 'expropriation regulations (with compensation obligations)'. The content regulation of property rights essentially means the protection of property rights in that it forms a property rights legal order, and the expropriation regulation means the restriction of property rights that make it impossible or remarkably difficult to act in the protected area. Therefore, both are independent legal systems.","PeriodicalId":115318,"journal":{"name":"Center for Legislative Studies, Gyeongin National University of Education","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Gap in the Legal Texts and the Supplementation by Interpretation - Focusing on the provisions and interpretations of property rights under Article 23 of the Constitution -\",\"authors\":\"Sang-sik Son\",\"doi\":\"10.58555/li.2022.2.57\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Constitution stipulates “The property rights of all citizens are guaranteed. The content and limitations are determined by law.” in Article 23 Paragraph 1, and paragraph 2 stipulates the constitutional limitations of property rights by stipulating that “the exercise of property rights should be suitable for public welfare.” And paragraph 3 stipulates that “the expropriation, use, or restriction of property rights due to public necessity and compensation thereof shall be made by law, but legitimate compensation shall be paid.” The separation theory excludes unconstitutional infringement of property rights and guarantees the existence of specific property rights of the subject of fundamental rights. In the case of excessive restrictions beyond social restrictions, according to the separation theory, it is not understood as the expropriation of Article 23 (3) of the Constitution, and various measures (relaxation measures) to alleviate the excessive burden will be considered first. The basic structure of property rights can be divided into 'content regulations without compensation obligations', 'content regulations with (coordinated) compensation obligations', and 'expropriation regulations (with compensation obligations)'. The content regulation of property rights essentially means the protection of property rights in that it forms a property rights legal order, and the expropriation regulation means the restriction of property rights that make it impossible or remarkably difficult to act in the protected area. Therefore, both are independent legal systems.\",\"PeriodicalId\":115318,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Center for Legislative Studies, Gyeongin National University of Education\",\"volume\":\"39 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Center for Legislative Studies, Gyeongin National University of Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.58555/li.2022.2.57\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Center for Legislative Studies, Gyeongin National University of Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58555/li.2022.2.57","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》规定:“公民的财产权受到保障。”其内容和限制由法律规定。第23条第1款和第2款规定了财产权的宪法限制,规定“财产权的行使应当适合于公共福利”。第三款规定:“由于公共需要,对财产权利的征收、使用或者限制及其补偿,应当依法规定,但是应当给予合理补偿。”分离论排除了财产权的违宪侵害,保障了基本权利主体的特定财产权的存在。在超出社会限制的过度限制的情况下,根据分离理论,不理解为对宪法第23条第(3)款的征用,而首先考虑减轻过度负担的各种措施(放宽措施)。产权的基本结构可以分为“无补偿义务的内容规制”、“有(协调)补偿义务的内容规制”和“有补偿义务的征收规制”。产权的内容规制本质上是对产权的保护,因为它形成了一种产权法律秩序;征用规制本质上是对在保护区内不可能或极其困难的产权进行限制。因此,两者都是独立的法律体系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Gap in the Legal Texts and the Supplementation by Interpretation - Focusing on the provisions and interpretations of property rights under Article 23 of the Constitution -
The Constitution stipulates “The property rights of all citizens are guaranteed. The content and limitations are determined by law.” in Article 23 Paragraph 1, and paragraph 2 stipulates the constitutional limitations of property rights by stipulating that “the exercise of property rights should be suitable for public welfare.” And paragraph 3 stipulates that “the expropriation, use, or restriction of property rights due to public necessity and compensation thereof shall be made by law, but legitimate compensation shall be paid.” The separation theory excludes unconstitutional infringement of property rights and guarantees the existence of specific property rights of the subject of fundamental rights. In the case of excessive restrictions beyond social restrictions, according to the separation theory, it is not understood as the expropriation of Article 23 (3) of the Constitution, and various measures (relaxation measures) to alleviate the excessive burden will be considered first. The basic structure of property rights can be divided into 'content regulations without compensation obligations', 'content regulations with (coordinated) compensation obligations', and 'expropriation regulations (with compensation obligations)'. The content regulation of property rights essentially means the protection of property rights in that it forms a property rights legal order, and the expropriation regulation means the restriction of property rights that make it impossible or remarkably difficult to act in the protected area. Therefore, both are independent legal systems.
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