연구개발 과제평가 행정작용 분석을 통한 행정처분의 조문모델 정립 - “요건판단＋효과결정＝행정처분”의 실험적 검토

⑴ The Constitution of the Republic of Korea (Article 127) declares that “the State shall endeavor to develop the national economy through innovation of science and technology and development of information and manpower.” The State is carrying out R & D on science and technology in order to shape the science and technology innovation of the Constitution (Article 127). The R & D budget supported through open competition among the R & D budget is implemented through the mid-term evaluation and the final evaluation starting from the R & D project selection evaluation. Therefore, the project evaluation corresponds to the central administration of science and technology research and development. ⑵ In order to select an excellent project, the administrative office shall conduct selection evaluation before the project is carried out, and the intermediate evaluation - annual evaluation or stage evaluation - during the project execution. Uncertainty and technical characteristics of science and technology, and the influence of the project evaluation on the people are the sources that demand the fairness, objectivity and expertise of the project evaluation by the public administration. ⑶ The process of the project evaluation can be divided into ⒜ review of basic items, ⒝ review of redundancy, ⒞ design of evaluation standard, ⒟ composition of evaluation group, ⒠ evaluation of evaluation group, ⒡ evaluation result preparation decision, ⒢ policy committee review, ⒣ evaluation result confirmation and notification. The project evaluation procedure can be typified by the procedure corresponding to Requirement-Judgment and the process corresponding to Effect-Decision. Procedures for Requirement-Judgment are: ⒜ review of basic items, ⒝ review of redundancy, ⒞ design of evaluation standard, ⒟ composition of evaluation group, ⒠ evaluation of evaluation group. Procedures for Effect-Decision are: ⒡ evaluation result preparation decision, ⒢ policy committee review, ⒣ evaluation result confirmation and notification. ⑷ Since the specific process of the project evaluation is divided into Requirement- Judgment and Effect-Decision, it is necessary to examine the defect of the project evaluation separately by the defect of Requirement-Judgment and the defect of Effect-Decision. The defect (absconding and abusing) of the discretion mentioned in the precedents need to be clearly distinguished from the defect of Requirement-Judgment and the defect of Effect-Decision ⑸ The project evaluation (administrative disposition) reviewed in this paper corresponds to the type of the indeterminate Requirement-Judgment and the discretionary Effect-Decision which are the most difficult among the four types of administrative disposition. Experts were used in indeterminate Requirement-Judgment, and experts were used in the discretionary Effect-Decision. Based on this review, I have developed a model of the four types of administrative disposition according to the type and difficulty of administrative disposition in order to enhance the rationality of administrative disposition.