國家에 의한 藝術支援의 法的 問題點

Legal Problems concerning the State"s Supports for the Arts

&nbsp;&nbsp;The modern state actually support the arts in several ways, and there can be hardly found criticism against the support any more; to a legal scholar(above all as a constitutional law matter) the question still remains, whether the state is mandated with an obligation(or a right) to support artists as well as their activities. In addition, if the question be answered positively, another one will arise: what could and should really be taken aim by the supports?<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;This article sequently scrutinize into the following questions: whether the artistic freedom(art. 22 I of the Korean Constitution) can be in harmony with the modern doctrine of culture state, subject to selective(i.e. discriminative) supports; whether the legal meanings of “arts” should be relatively conceptualized in different laws, including the constitution, copyright law, criminal law, culture protection law as well as culture promotion law; whether copyright system, originally prepared by the state for incentives to artists as indirect support, could be burdensome to other ones, on the contrary; and finally legal problems of national endowment as direct support.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;All those mentioned above, required us to turn about to see aim(s) of national supports to artists. In a liberal society, these are probably impartial supports for spreading, not evaluating, every kind of culture. So, a state can support individual artists and their activities, consume their works, supply them with possible public helps and tax benefits; among them, all the topics but for the last were mentioned here.<BR>&nbsp;&nbsp;The meaning of arts will reach so far that the state is susceptible to a great temptation to maneuver artistic activities as it wants, which always runs counter to our constitutional order. In conclusion, the state has a duty of impartiality as censor, consumer as well as benefactor.