2019, Vol., No.85

DONG-A LAW REVIEW 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.65

pISSN : 1225-3405 / eISSN : 2713-5470
https://journal.kci.go.kr/dongalaw

This article is to study on the establishment and the changing process of university that took place in Busan after Liberation from Japanese colonial rule. The establishment of Busan Nat’l University and Dong-A Univ. was the initial start in college education at Busan and Gyeongnam province. In particular, Dong-A Univ. was not the start of Dong-A Univ. itself. It had a former Univ., that was to say ‘Namseon’ college or ‘Namjoseon Beopmunhakwon(南朝鮮法文學院)’. It became a representative university in Busan and Gyeongnam province, which launched private university education after Liberation. At that time, as for solving the local community’s desire to establish a university, a group of local public figures and U.S. military officials played an important role in the matter. Accordingly they sought to understand the confusion that has occurred in that social relations. In addition, this article aims to study the early establishment course of Dong-A Univ. and the education of law that were implemented for the first time since liberation. Namseon college, the predecessor of the present Dong-A Univ., had many problems in the school’s accreditation, which were insufficient finances, facilities and legal flaws. Therefore the school was renamed as ‘Namjoseon Beopmunhakwon(南朝鮮法文學院)’ without authorization. But in June of the same year(1946), the school was conditionally allowed to open with a one-year. In the end Dong-A univ.(President of the Foundation, Jeong Jae-hwan) undertook the Namseon college. After Jeong Jae-hwan took over (September 1946) the school, he went through a phase of re-establishment of his college education, especially law school department. This article ultimately carrys out a basic review of the actual law education of Dong-A Univ. after Liberation.

In this article, I review Carl Schmitt’s concept of ‘Recht’ by analyzing his entire works. He is known for a decisionist, but his decision is a mere instrumental measure that can create order from chaos. After Hitler came to power, he emphasized concrete-order legal thinking rather than decisionism, and pointed out that a third type of legal thinking had to be added to his former distinction normativism and decisionism. Schmitt elaborated the relation between these three types of legal thinking and introduced Nomos, including decisionist and institutional elements. According to him, Nomos does not mean law in the sense of rule or Gesetz, but rather both decision and order. He also emphasized the spatial dimension of Nomos by asserting that Nomos is the unity of order(Ordnung) and location(Ortnung). Schmitt continued his inquiry into the original meaning of Nomos by distinguishing three different meanings: The first meaning is “to take” or “to appropriate”; The second meaning is “to divide” or “to distribute”; The third meaning is “to produce”. Furthermore, Schmitt’s concept of Nomos is especially relevant for international relations. He asserted that Nomos has reflected the spatial order of earth throughout the world history. According to him, the first Nomos was a pure terrestrial Nomos lasting until the 16th century. The second Nomos began with the opening of the oceans, the circum- navigation of the earth and the Conquista. This Nomos was purely Eurocentric, because European nations discovered and conquered the new world. After WWⅡ, however, this Eurocentric Nomos was destroyed and the Cold War division of the earth into East and West became the new Nomos. Schmitt foresaw two possibilities of a new Nomos. The first was a complete victory of one of the superpowers over the other and the united world. He rejected, however, this possibility from his anti-universalist standpoint. As a second possibility, Schmitt opted for a pluralistic Nomos of the earth. He did not give up hope for this new Nomos: There are gods and they reign, great is their measure.

Trotz der unterschiedlichen Regierungsformen in jedem Land gibt es die Begnadigung in verschiedenen Formen. Begnadigung nach der gegenwärtigen Verfassung ist die Befugnis des Präsidenten, die Entscheidung der Justiz aufzuheben und in die Gesellschaft zurückzukehren, ohne die Strafverfolgung derjenigen zu unterlassen, die gegen das Gesetz verstoßen haben. Es muss festgestellt werden, ob die Begnadigung fortbestehen muss, und wenn ja, was getan werden kann, um das Problem des Missbrauchs anzugehen. Es ist notwendig, die Rechtslage zu überdenken, ob eine Begnadigung gesetzlich erforderlich ist und wenn ja, ob die Begnadigung mit den Grundsätzen der Rechtsstaatlichkeit oder einem heterogenen Faktor vereinbar ist, welche Art von Begnadigung ist für jede Epoche angemessen und wer sollte Autorität ausüben. In dieser Diskussion erklären wir zunächst die Geschichte und die Grundlagen der Begnadigung(II) und betrachten das Thema des Begnadigungmissbrauchs, um zu verstehen, warum die kritische Sichtweise der Begnadigung so weit verbreitet ist (III) und um die Rechtfertigung einer solchen Begnadigung sicherzustellen. In dieser Arbeit wird ein Verbesserungsplan für Korea vorgeschlagen(Ⅳ). Die wichtigsten Faktoren bei Pisten sind Fairness und Unabhängigkeit. Daher sollte zunächst die Unabhängigkeit des Begnadignug Review Committee sichergestellt und so ausgeübt werden.