국가 완전주의 쟁점과 법해석

The issue whether perfectionist purpose is a legitimate basis for state action has enormous potential to influence on conclusion at many points in the interpretation of the law. In particular, perfectionist interpretation can make the structures and points of the principles of restriction on basic rights including the principle of the prohibition of excessive restriction and the nature of subjective rights radically different, both quantitatively and qualitatively. Not to deal with objections related to the issue of perfectionism is against publicity principle. To select merits and demerits perfectionist and anti-perfectionist arguments on a case-by-case basis is to presuppose an unwarranted meta-position and therefore violates law’s integrity. The arguments that perfectionism can be a secured barrier to the essentials of liberalism ultimately fail. These views are either based on a incoherent value theory or lean heavily on empirical assumptions that can be more or less weak from case to case. Thus the argument that perfectionism should be endorsed if it is moderate, multicentered, pluralistic and non-coercive in nature is based on false premises. Interpretation of the law can only be completely perfectionist or anti-perfectionist all the way down and the lawyers must decide one way or the other on this issue. The failure of national perfectionism’s attempt to secure liberal constitutional essentials should be understood as the result of adoption of teleology. Teleologies in general presuppose that there is no difficulty of transition from the first-person standpoint to second-person standpoint. Thus valid answers to the former standpoint’s questions are naturally regarded as also valid answers to the latter standpoint’s questions. If perfectionism is an unreasonable idea, then it is only when we establish a structure of legal arguments that clearly and explicitly reveal the people’s second personal status that the barriers against the infiltration of perfectionist interpretation can be established.