법적 표현주의와 표현적 해악의 본성

Various claims have been attempted under the name of legal expressivism. This article categorizes legal expressivism into two broad categories: (1) a series of trends in which law seeks to extend the causal impact on society and its members’ behavioral changes, and (2) a view that notes the nature of the law as a semantically integrated system and argues that this nature provides a normative basis for legitimate law. Of these two, the argument that I want to pay attention to in this paper is the second view, which argues that legal expressivism further expands our understanding of the nature of law as a norm, thereby fundamentally changing our traditional view of recognizing the specific content of law. The expressive view becomes more apparent in the process of identifying the specific meaning of legal statements. The meaning of a legal statement must be grasped by observing internal acceptance of members of the society who incorporate the statement into their own legal system. Observing this behavior shows that social members associate legal statements with their value systems that are critically related to their humane lives, and accept the legal system as an integrated semantic system rather than as fragmented statements. Whereas existing non-expressive perspectives are concerned with the resulting benefits of applying the law to cases, the attention given to by legal expressivism lies in the benefits gained by maintaining the integrity of the semantics of legal system, and the expressive harm caused by the infringement of this integrity. Maintaining integrity of legal statements is particularly important because it is closely related to the interest of the community to maintain and preserve the members’ acceptance of the legal system and thereby to make the legal system the law of the society.