일본 개정 행정사건소송법상 원고적격에 관한 연구 - 판례이론을 중심으로 -

Japanese revised administrative litigations law is standing that a strict interpretation of the and corrective, the entrance to the administrative litigations rather than narrowly, the judge of rights and interests of the people to actually enable relief interpret the instructions as a concept is defined. Thus, in interpreting administrative standing of, corresponding to a specific conflict situations, judicial relief is denied by a flexible interpretation to avoid a lawsuit is expected to be operational. In 'Review 'Board administrative litigation', 'standing' for the concept is ccording to the right of the people and issues to allow for relief has been described as open. Such interpretation is based on intent-If operating, administrative litigation would be to achieve a faithful social role. However, the amendments clarify the administrative litigation after the theoretical position of the system design, it's in response to the litigation to define the requirements for standing as a dogeumatik or directionality was not visible. In addition, this revision of the law of the rationale for the existing standing conflict to put an end to the shooting was not the intention does not exist. Thus, the reform of the rights and interests of the people of the default position under the realization of substantial relief, phrases and without touching the structure of Article 9, the rigidity seen in the analysis is intended to break it, the essential reform the system of administrative litigation can not be said. This Amendment to enforce the first five years after a review of anything can be seen. However, several amendments institutional framework suggests to us an example to us is enough to think it's worth. Also, look at Article 9 of integrated, linked Article 9Sections 1 and 2 are connected to each other, any case whether to allow judgment to operate a comprehensive, if so many people's real rights in the bailout is expected to contribute.