공무원 겸직 제한 법제의 헌법적 타당성 검토 및 신고제로의 전환 제언 - 국가공무원법 제64조, 국가공무원 복무규정 제25조와 제26조를 중심으로 -

With the recent boom of sideline activities, the rise of the MZ generation, and changes in occupational values, the time has come to discuss ways to improve the law restricting secondary employment of public officials. Article 64, Paragraph 1 of the State Public Officials Act stipulates that public officials cannot engage in for-profit business and cannot engage in other secondary employment without permission, taking a strict legislative form of prohibition in principle and exceptional permission for secondary employment. As a result, even public officials' hobbies and other areas of private life that do not interfere with the performance of official duties are widely regulated. As public officials also have basic rights and private lives that need to be protected, laws related to secondary employment need to be designed in a way that respects the freedom of public officials to hold secondary employment outside of working hours. The purpose of this study is to review the constitutional validity of Article 64 of the State Public Officials Act and Articles 25 and 26 of the Service Regulations for State Public Officials, and to suggest legislative alternatives. First, this study will look at how the law restricting secondary employment is being interpreted and operated, and look at the values ​​presented as the basis for restrictions on secondary employment. On this basis, after explaining the social background in which the restriction on secondary employment is requested, this study will point out that the current legislation is at least legislatively inappropriate from the point of view of the principle of proportionality. Ultimately, this study would like to conclude by presenting a legislative alternative to convert the concurrent position restriction legislation to a reporting system by referring to German legislative examples.