독도의 헌법적 지위 - 신한일어업협정에 대한 헌법재판소의 결정을 중심으로 -

According to the Korean Constitution Article 3 the territory of the Republic of Korea shall be formed from Korean perninsula and its adjacent islands. Relating to constitutional interpretation of Article 3 in Korean Constitution most of Korean jurists and people think that Dok Do is included in Korean perninsula’s adjacent islands. The constitutional status of Dok Do as Korean maritime province can reach acceptable level through new revision or aboliton of new agreement on Fisheries Zone between Korea and Japan as a trial to reach new formal written agreement on Dok do’s legal status as Korean territory between Korea and Japan. In this argument over new revision or aboliton of new agreement on Fisheries Zone between Korea and Japan constitutional basis on the constitutional status of Dok Do can be founded. Korean Constitutional Court made a decision on constitutionality of the new agreement on Fisheries Zone betweem Korea and Japan. In this case Korean Constitutional Court ruled over this case according to opinion of governemt and National Parliament at that time, which took part in procedure for agreement on this treaty. But this reticent attitude of the Korean Constitutional Court is not desirable. When the question about legitimacy of territorial supreme power of government (Gebietshoheit) is raised by the people as a souvereign having the highest power in a country, thesis on the people’s territorial sovereignty in constitutional theory could be justfied in the national legal order. In this point constitutional status of Dok Do in national legal order is limited to the objective of state’s territoral supreme power. The constitutional status of Dok Do can be obtained confirmation through this classification between territorial sovereignty and territorial supreme power.