지방의회의 조례에 대한 사법적 통제방안

Municipal ordinances are (outcomes of) legislative action as part of government authority and can be a subject of a constitutional appeal. If the municipal ordinance receives a decision on acceptance in a constitutional appeal, it will lose its effect on the date of the decision in principle. The court may begin indirective norm control to examine whether the municipal ordinance violates the constitution or law as a preliminary consideration of judgment on the merits in a trial. If an municipal ordinance violates the constitution or law, only its application can be excluded from the case, but it will remain effective formally. Since there is no proper agencies or methods to resolve disputes between members of the local assembly and chair of the local assembly other than competence dispute, it would be reasonable for the Constitutional Court to recognize competence dispute to carry out its mission of competence dispute granted by the Constitution. A cancellation or confirmation of nullity decision itself dissolves the effect of legislative action directly, which results in the municipal ordinance's loss of effect. The object of the norm-controlled competence dispute is not a “defect in the legislative procedure” but a “legislative action for an municipal ordinance” and such a adjudication judges the unconstitutionality of its contents. However, it would be distinguished from ordinary norm control in that it is a “legislative action for the municipal ordinance”, not a “municipal ordinance” itself. The agency litigation shall be the parties to the agency of the local government, that is, the local assembly, the resolution agency, and the head of the local government, the executive agency. If only part of the re-decision is illegal and denies the full effect of the re-decision, the municipal ordinance will be placed in the same situation as it has not been effective from the beginning.