영국과 독일의 행정심판제도 개혁 경과에 관한 비교법적 연구

A Comparative Legal Study on the British, German and Korean Administrative Appeals Tribunal Systems

This study aims to examine the development of the Korean Administrative Appeals Tribunal System by comparing it with its overseas counterparts. This comparative legal study targets the system of the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic of Germany because they represent two typical controversial types of review systems of administrative appeals and are now in the process of re-examination. The British tribunal system used to have more than 60 kinds of tribunals, which were re-organized and integrated into two categories under the supervision of a single senior president: the First-Tier and the Upper Tribunals. The Tribunals became the most frequently used administrative dispute resolution system in the United Kingdom after the change. The review system for administrative appeals in the Federal Republic of Germany is part of the Administrative Litigation Act without the support of independent legislation. This operates only as a preparatory procedure of administrative litigation. The current reform process aims for the simplification of the total litigation procedure because of problems with time and expenses. The history of Korean system begins with the Appeals Act of 1951. The original system was similar to the German system, designed as essential preparation of administrative litigation with administrative appeals reviewed by the overseeing body. The Korean system followed the reform line of the United Kingdom after the Administrative Appeals Act of 2010. The revision established the Central Administrative Appeals Commission(CAAC), an independent integrated decision-making organization of administrative appeals cases. There are still various problems to solve. For example, the integration was partial because many Special Administrative Appeals Review Organizations, such as the Tax Tribunals and Land Tribunals are still separate from the CAAC.