행정상 법률관계에 대한 새로운 고찰

In light of the general opinion about the relationship between legal requirements and legal effects, legal relations are nothing but a legal effect. Whether stakeholders are aware of it or not, logically speaking, legal relations do not take place as a legal effect until legal requirements, including legal acts, and either public or private law set to work all together. From this stance, ‘power relations’, ‘management relations (non-power relations)’, ‘procurement administrative relations’, ‘profit activity relations’, and ‘administrative private law relations’ can be understood not as types of ‘legal relations’ but as a mere act, area, or daily living relation subject to the application of law. Nevertheless, bearing in mind particular administrative areas, the majority opinion argues that types of legal relations can be divided into ‘management relations’, ‘administrative private law relations’, ‘procurement administrative relations’, and ‘profit activity relations’. Management relations are again classified as one of public law relations, while ‘administrative private law relations’, ‘procurement administrative relations’, and ‘profit activity relations’ are classified as one of private law relations. For this reason, when making a judgment to solve a legal issue, a conclusion is made in advance whether the issue falls under public or private law relations depending on the area of the administration. If it is determined as private law relations, it is then considered whether to apply regulations of public law. On the other hand, if it is determined as public law relations but still uses, for example, a form of a contract, it is then considered whether to apply a private law, in principle, because contracts are usually used in private law relations. Still further, because the issue basically belongs to public law relations, whether to apply a public law is again considered. The current theories that view legal relations as a priori before the law and uniformly recognize them need to be changed. Existing academia is also aware of the weaknesses and limitations of the majority theory and making efforts to solve them, but fundamental solutions seem difficult due to the limitations of the methodology. Instead of subdividing public or private law relations, judgment of public or private law should precede that of public or private law relations. When making a distinction between public and private laws, it should be understood that whether being public or private law can vary according to not just the unit of law but also the unit of provision. Careful attention should be given to see if it is necessary to subdivide any procedure or act subject to the application of law into various acts with different legal characters.