대통령 법률안 재의요구권(거부권) 행사 사례분석을 통한 개선방안 연구 -간호법 사례를 중심으로-

This study examines whether the President’s veto of the Nursing Act bill passed by the 21st National Assembly was constitutionally justified and proposes principled limits and reform measures for the presidential veto within Korea’s constitutional order. Historically, the presidential veto has been exercised only in highly exceptional circumstances since the Syngman Rhee administration. However, its frequent use under the Yoon Suk-yeol government has raised concerns regarding infringement of the National Assembly’s legislative authority and violations of the separation of powers. Focusing on Article 53 of the Korean Constitution, the study analyzes the concept, functions, and procedural requirements of the presidential veto and identifies its substantive limits as confined to cases of unconstitutionality or fiscal impossibility. An examination of the reasons offered for vetoing the Nursing Act—potential infringement of the right to health and alleged restrictions on occupational freedom—shows that the bill vetoed in the 21st National Assembly and the bill enacted in the 22nd National Assembly were essentially identical in legislative structure and content. The fact that the former was vetoed while the latter was enacted within a year suggests that the veto was not constitutionally justified. The study proposes several reforms: constitutional clarification of legitimate grounds for exercising the veto; strengthening the substantive roles of the Prime Minister’s countersignature and State Council deliberation; adjusting the National Assembly’s quorum and deadlines for reconsideration votes; and, outside constitutional amendment, encouraging presidential self-restraint and the National Assembly’s adherence to procedural democracy. These measures are expected to help restore the balance of power between the President and the National Assembly, thereby enhancing the rule of law and legal predictability.