보안경찰법상 일반적 수권조항에 관한 연구

General Enabling Clauses on the Performance Duties of Police Officers

법치행정의 원리는 경찰행정작용에도 적용된다. 경찰권발동과 법률유보와의 관계에서 경찰작용에 관한 일반적 수권조항의 필요성과 허용성 및 그 존부에 관한 학설과 판례는 크게 긍정설과 부정설로 구분된다. 긍정설의 논거는 「경찰관직무집행법」 제2조 또는 제5조 및 제6조 등이다. 대법원은 일관하여 긍정설의 입장에 서 있는 데에 반하여, 헌법재판소는 최근 부정설의 입장을 취하고 있다. 경찰관직무집행법의 제정 및 개정경과를 살펴보면 실제상 일반적 수권조항의 필요성을 인정하기 어렵다. 학설과 판례의 태도 역시 경찰권의 발동과 법률유보와의 관계에서 그 필요성이나 허용성이 부정되어야 할 것으로 본다. 따라서 실정법상 일반적 수권조항은 존재하지 않으며, 나아가 향후 일반적 수권 조항에 관한 법률의 제정 또는 개정 필요성도 부인되어야 한다. 일반적 수권조항이 실제상으로나 이론상으로도 불필요하기 때문이다.

Act on the Performance Duties of Police Officers was enacted in 1953. In this paper I would like to research theories and precedents as to the necessity, the admissibility of a general enabling clause and the existence of a general enabling clause in our positive law system on the peace preservation police. And analysing the backgrounds and details of enactment and amendments of the Act above. I would like to consider critically the theories and precedents as to the necessity, admissibility of a general enabling clause, the existence of a general enabling clause in our positive law and the need for legislation of a general enabling clause. They are divided into two parts ; affirmative and negative. The Supreme Court set a precedent that the article 2 etc. of the Act on the Performance Duties of Police Officers is the general enabling clause in exercising the police authority and the Court follows the precedents till now. On the contrary, the Constitutional Court is deciding that the article 2 of the Act above is not the general enabling clause in exercising the police authority in a recent constitutional appeal judgement. The Court made a decision that acknowledgment of the existence of the general enabling clause in exercising the police authority is destroying the rule of law, Vorbehalt des Gesetzes. And finally, admitting that the article 2 of the Act above is the general enabling clause in exercising the police authority, it is not constitutional ground, for it goes against the principle of disclosure. The Act, 1953 provided six standard measures, and the current Act provides only 7 standard measures. This means that any more standard measure and general enabling clause is not needed in reality. In conclusion, I deny the necessity, admissibility of a general enabling clause, the existence of it and the need for its legislation. And I dissent any enactment or amendment the Act concerned, for any more standard measure and general enabling clause is not needed in reality. In addition, the current clauses of standard measures in exercising the police authority are provided excessive indeterminate conceptions. And they are apt to be in use as a general enabling clause. We shall reorganize the individual enabling clauses in exercising the police authority systematically and comprehensively. In company with it, we shall research the legislative modification measure of the current Act on the Performance Duties of Police Officers to be within the limit of the principle of excessive enactment prohibition.