『한국 사회에서 정의란 무엇인가』에 대한 비판적 검토 ― 정의의 원천으로서의 헌법, 그리고 제도선행적 응분원칙의 이해에 대한 의문을 중심으로―

This article critically examines two questions from Dokyun Kim’s, Theory of Justice in Korea (hereinafter, ‘TJK’). First, it raises a question about the attempt to find the justice of Korean society in the constitution. Such an attempt seems to conflict with the role of the theory of justice in evaluating a social system. Second, the relationship between the principles of justice revealed in the discussion of TJK is obscure and is insufficient to solve “the priority problem”, which is the core task of the social justice theory raised by Rawls. For this, this paper explains the debate over the institutional view of desert and the priority problem of Rawls. Furthermore, the author’s position on the relationship between plural principles of justice, which is clearly revealed in Chapter 2 of TJK, should be reconstructed. This paper argues that Kim’s view stems from a series of misunderstandings about Rawls’ priority problem and the debates on Rawls’ institutional theory of desert, and that the attempt to raise the position of desert principle to a prima facie principle of pluralism has failed.