행정심판제도의 기능과 책임성 강화에 대한 고찰

In a recent study report, it was argued that it is necessary to unify the administrative trial system to strengthen the function of administrative trials and to secure fairness, and to achieve this, the administrative trial bodies should be integrated step by step. Due to this report, the discussions on administrative trials have expanded to legal and policy issues. There has been a study that the issue of dissatisfaction with the decision of the administrative judge must be prepared from the self-control function of the administrative judge. In Article 107, Paragraph 3 of the Constitution, it has been argued that even though the administrative retrieval function emphasizes the right to remedy as a preliminary procedure in the trial, the supervisory function within the administration for the realization of the rule of law must be emphasized. The binding force of the ruling is only to prevent the administrative agency from requesting an administrative trial again, and it is not a legal logic that excludes dissent by judicial proceedings. After reviewing the existing prior studies focusing on the possibility of the agency's dissatisfaction with respect to reconsideration, as a comparative law review, a system for reviewing the possibility of dissatisfaction with the disposition agency through a third institution for administrative judgment and reconsideration of local tax in Germany Introducing. As an implication, it is desirable that an administrative agency with supervisory authority is primarily responsible for administrative review in order to strengthen the self-control function among administrative judges. It is necessary to reduce the number of non-permanent judge currently in operation, expand the number of permanent judge, and disclose judge name on decision.