행정준칙의 법적구속력과 행정의 합리성

In traditional theory of legal sources, 'delegated legislations', e.g. Presidential or Departmental Decree have been considered as part of the rule of law. Another voluntary 'administrative rules' have not. But a series of Supreme Court precedents not matching the traditional doctrine brought many lawyers to a stand. The precedents can be separated into two types. One is a denial of legal effect on standards for sanctions in Departmental Decrees. That should be requested by the principle of proportionality and means the respect of result which originates from teleology. The other is in deference to administrative policies on license or admissions, can be explained by the principle of equality and the respect of rule which originates from deontology, I think. Based on this analysis, I find the limitation of the traditional doctrine and explore propriety of transition to the views of reasonableness. First, in formal terms of rationality, the administrative rules, though not law, act as a reason of decisions. That can be found in a number of the Court rulings. Second, substantial rationality may consist of the general principles of administrative law in our Continental legal system.