현행 예산의 법적 성질에 대한 고찰‒ 예산의 실무상 운영을 중심으로 ‒

The purpose of this paper is to examine the legality of the budget as a premise for the discussion of budget legalism. The budget is different from administrative legislation in that it is controlled by the National Assembly and is equal to the law. If budget legalism is simply the intention to legalize the budget, this is already reflected in the current budget system. However, the budget has different aspects from the law, such as only the internal effect of the state organization and no effect on the public, but this is the result of taking into account the reality and will not change even if the budget is legalized. In practical terms, revenue budget and expenditure budget are divided. Revenue budgets are only forecasts for the future and do not limit the country's income. The expenditure budget strictly restrains the state's expenditure in terms of purpose, amount, and timing. Both the budget and the law are similar in that they are controlled by the National Assembly. However, the constitution separates the two. The budget differs in that the law is a permanent law, whereas the budget is a temporary law that applies only for one year. The two have “mutual independence” because they cannot change each other, but they also have “mutual relevance” in that the state cannot engage in spending unless one of the budget and laws is established. In addition, the budget and the law have a predecessor relationship, and only after the law is established, the government can formulate a budget. The budget differs in the effectiveness of the appropriation budget and the revenue budget in practice, and is operated with a special relationship with the law. With reference to this, hope that the discussion of budget legalism can develop in a practical direction in the future. In addition, look forward to discussing the external and public effects of the budget in the future.