세종시·지역균형개발 정책과 입법방향

• 영문명: The Se-Jong City·The Balanced Regional Development Policy And Legislative Policy
• 발행기관: 경희법학연구소
• 저자명: 강경덕(Kang, Kyoung-Duck) 강준구(Kang, Joon-Koo) 김지연(Kim, Ji-Yeon) 오준호(Oh, Joon-Ho) 이준철(Lee, Jun-Chul) 장유리(Jang, You-Ri)
• 간행물 정보: 『KHU 글로벌 기업법무 리뷰』제3권 제1호, 141~178쪽, 전체 38쪽
• 주제분류: 법학 > 민법
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2010.06.30

영문 초록

After the plan to move the administrative functions of the Capital was ruled unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court, the policy was changed and was implemented in a downsized form of moving a few number of administrative organs. However the recent government amendment which nullifies moving of any administrative organ has flamed controversy on all sides. The notion of regional equity reflects the constitutional principle of equality and it is the central idea behind local self-government. Moreover, balanced regional development will help to resolve the increasing disparity between the Greater Metropolitan area and others regions as well as increasing economic and social efficiency. We need to look at the Se-jong city issue in this context. Construction of Se-jong city was first conceived by the Park Jung-Hee regime and hence is not an issue confined to this current administration. Also this policy should not be seen as a mere appeasement to the people of Chung-Cheong province. The validity of the policy should be assessed in the wider principle and context of balanced national development. When in comparing the validity of the original legislation and the government amendment, those in favor of the amendment criticize that the original bill will harm administrative efficiency. However, this is purely a “Seoul-centric” analysis and it is inconsistent with the principle of balanced regional development. The original plan is more efficient on a nationwide scale compared with the amendment. Administrative inefficiency has to be accepted up to a certain degree as a price for balanced regional development and numerous compensative policies can be introduce to minimize the problem. Furthermore, the fact that the original plan already guarantees self-sufficiency of Se-jong as a city makes the claim that the amendment will help to create a self-sufficient city, meaningless. Therefore, the amendment is less satisfactory not only in the context of balanced regional development, but also efficiency-wise. The amendment also has a normative problem. It lacks in democratic legitimacy since there were no proper discussions involving all social voices and there were not enough objective evaluations and analyses. Also it is not in consonance with already existing legislations on balanced national development. The region selected by the amendment does not possess any notable superiority over other regions as a education-science city. Hence it is possible that it is in violation of the consitutional principle of non-discrimination since there is no rational reason for the selection. After examination of the above mentioned rationales, it can be concluded that, without extensive changes and supplementary measures, the amendment is unlikely to pass the National Assembly. If the government retracts the amendment or makes extensive changes to it as to allow part of the executive branch to move to Se-jong, we can expect that the national consensus of the location of the capital city could change as well. Then the customary constitutional principle which makes Seoul the Capital could be overturned by the Constitutional Court and more complete move of the Capital and its administrative functions can be expected to follow.

목차

Ⅰ. 문제의 제기

Ⅱ. 우리나라의 지역균형개발을 위한 시도들 - 연혁적 검토

Ⅲ. 세종시 발전에 대한 원안과 수정안의 대립- 정책적 검토

Ⅳ. 세종시 수정법안에 대한 입법적 검토

Ⅴ. 결론 및 요약