헌법재판소의 신뢰보호원칙 심사기준에 대한 평가

It requires no further explanation that the dependence of the individual isgrown by the state. Against the background of rapidly changing circumstancesand legal framework on the one hand and rising dependence on the state onthe other hand, the human desire plays a much more important for reliabilityand continuity. Especially in times of permanent change and impermanencejust need the legal system reliability. The principle of trust protection principleis a toolbox to the side that can put citizen in a position against the Stateto enforce a minimum level of reliable and continuous legislation. The citizen must be able to trust that is recognized to be the applicablelaw to act accordingly by law with all original legal consequences. If thelegislature subsequently unfavorable legal consequences linked to completedoffenses, of which the citizen was entitled at his disposition, so the citizenis injured in his reliance on the existence of the legal system. The Korean Constitutional Court has spoken positively and logically for theworthiness of protection of citizens’ trust: “With respect to the worthinessof protection of citizens trust is whether private trade has been initiated bythe State or any of its organs or only by the personal confidence of the citizen. It's not on his subjective perception and individual situation, but depends onwhether the existing legislation was suitable when viewed objectively, to justifya reliance of citizens on their survival. If the initiative emanates straightfrom the statutory basis of trust, the privileged nature of trust has beenrecognized. The assessment of the privileged nature of trust requires a balancingof the interests of those concerned with the public interest in a waiver oramendment of the trust basis.” Transitional provisions will be required to warranty that addressees canalso set to the changed situation by the new rules. The Korean Constitutional Court justified the refusal of legitimate as follows:“Even if a change in law will propose and the person actually expectslawmakers for engaging in protected rights must have legitimized reasons.”The statement of the Korean Constitutional Court aims, the citizen can’t relyon the existence of the applicable law. According to the jurisprudence of the Korean Constitutional Court, theprotection of legitimate interests of the citizen is able to prevail over thepublic interest pursued by the legislature as part of the assessment.