행정법상 비례의 원칙 ― 대법원 판례를 중심으로 ―

The principle of proportionality can be regarded as a general principle reasonably applicable to all areas of administration, as a “dominant guiding principle for all national actions”as adjudicated by the Federal Constitutional Court of Germany. Whereas the principle of proportionality needs to be concretized when the abstractness of its concept, etc. is considered, the criteria for examinationof the principle of proportionality of the Supreme Court of Korea have not been actively discussed by legal scholars. However, the Supreme Court of Korea is generally evaluated to have applied mostly the principle of proportionality in a narrow sense, which is thought to be caused by the fact that the judgment of the Supreme Court of Korea is rendered based on concrete facts of the case concerned, unlike the judgment of the Constitutional Court of Korea. Based on the above understanding of the situation, etc., in this thesis general review of the principle of proportionality under administrative law is conducted with emphasis on the precedents of the Supreme Court of Korea. The Supreme Court examines the principle of proportionality in relation to orders, rules, etc. in a manner similar to the Constitutional Court’s control of norms under the principle of proportionality. On the other hand, it can be evaluated that, in the area of administrative law where it is examined whether discretionary authority, etc. are abused or not in taking a specific administrative measure, the Supreme Court has conducted a simple examination of the principle of proportionality with stress laid on the principle of proportionality in a narrow sense, in consideration of the characteristics of administrative adjudication that is rendered based on concrete facts of the case concerned. In-depth research and study on the qualities, substance, etc. of the principle of proportionality would be necessary on a continuing basis, in order that the criteria, etc. for examination of the principle of proportionality reflecting the characteristics of each individual case may be properly settled in place through court’s judgments, etc.