소유 담론의 확장과 대안을 위한 소고

The Article 23 of Constitution declares that it protects the individual property and proprietary rights in the dimension of basic rights, exceptionally limiting its scope and exercise if necessary for public needs. This provision seemingly does not have any problem as abstract criteria in pursuing the idea of liberal market economy. However, when we consider that the Republic has traditionally required the existence of independent citizen who can make a decision by themselves to keep its vitality, the social approach to the property (proprietary) needs to go beyond the mere recognition and adjustment for property. In a situation in which the inheritance of poverty and severe inequality is usually attributed to the property inequality in the life starting stage, it is inevitable to devise ways and means to secure substantial citizens’ identity in the form of revising the concept of property. As a requisite for preparing this work, the author has attempted to have a general idea of the nature of property in society by analyzing the main idea about property expressed in the writings of several influential thinkers including those who are Aristotle, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Stuart Mill and Radbruch. In their works, the author finds out the common denominator that even though they had approved the property, they did not allow the excessive accumulation and waste, and emphasized that the purpose of the goods must be in the increasing utility of the community, its members more specifically. As well as in the case of the above writers, the innovative concept for property, namely the idea of “property for all”, can be seen in the liberalists’ thinking such as Schumpeter’s writings. Thus, the author suggests that we should set forth the alternative solution for the property through recovering the etymologic roots, in which the character of property (or proprietary) can be interchanged with the word, propriety.