미국 연방선거법상 기업의 정치적 독립지출허용의 의미와 시사점 －Citizens United v. FEC 판례를 중심으로－

The American election law recognized the freedom of election campaigns broadly, but legislated FECA and BCPA additionally to secure election justice after undergoing political events including the Watergate Affair(1972) etc. However, there almost never be regulations of political activities besides laws and regulations for advertisement including promoting materials, but there are regulations related to contribution, expenditure and accounting report of election expenses. In 2010, as for Citizens United v. FEC Judgment disclosing the violation of election law which let companies not pay expenses of political advertisement, scholars who argued the importance of securing election justice gave contrary opinions against the judgment. On the other hand, Korea has strictly regulated election campaigns and political fund system according to the principle of the constitution and the public offices election law securing justice with the freedom of election. However, recently as request for political participation followed by development of new means of communication has been increased with 2012 presidential election and national assembly member election ahead, there have been discussions to magnify freedom. And according to introduction of overseas election, request for security of justice is being increased. Democratic countries in the 21st century have other principles and historical backgrounds, but it is their main theme of election law to find harmony between the principles of freedom and justice. This article has focused on the doctrine of avoiding decisions disposing constitutional issues traditionally established by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court has been reluctantly deciding cases including the constitutional issues.