[일반논문] 憲法所願의 對象適格으로서의 行政作用에 關漢 연구

A Study on the Administrative Practice as the Object of Constitutional Complaints.

Constitutional Complaints is a new kind of constitutional litigation adopted when the Court was established. It is the most distinctive feature of the Constitutional Court. Under the Constitutional Court Act, anyone whose fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution have been infringed through the exercise or nonexercise of governmental powers may petition the Constitutional Court for relief. If a legislative act, presidential decree, ordinance or other law directly infringes upon an individual's fundamental or basic rights, the individual may file a Constitutional Complaint against the Jaw itself. This is another type of Constitutionality of Law case. Constitutional Complaints serve both functions: to protect the individual's fundamental rights and to safeguard the Constitution. Since Constitutional Copmplaints are a special and supplemental remedy for fundamental rights, anyone who wants to file a Constitutional Complaint must exhaust all prior procedures to remedy the situation, if any is provided for by law. But the Court has established some exceptions to this principle, which serves the latter function of Constitutional Complaints. For instance, if a case contains a significant constitutional issue, the merit of the case can still be heard, despite the fact that the petitioner did not exhaust all procedures. However, a decision of ordinary court is excepted from Constitutional Complaints according to the Constitutional Court Act § 68 (1) and is also in the case of being other remedy system or procedure. Therefore, in the case of losing lawsuit at administrative court, is it possible or not that the individual who infringes upon an individual's fundamental or basic rights sues a Constitutional Complaint about the administrative practice been the object of lawsuit at administrative court. In this note is studied about right that subject.