지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
I tackle on the question of conferral of standing to sue upon environmental nongovernmental organization in this article.
Basically environmental interest is general and collective. Our country's related acts doesn't confer standing to sue upon nongovernmental organization except consumers' protection organization and stock exchange- related organization in traditional concepts of standing. As environmental problem is related to damages of wide region, lots of adversely affected peoples and special character of public interest, the class action or action by organization is needed.
Legal issues of this case was whether neighbouring residents or environmental nongovernmental organizations who are also the third party of administrative agency's action have legal interest to sue or not. Our supreme court decided that not only neighbors who don't reside in environmental impact assessment-needed region but also citizens, mountaineers, photographers, scholars, corporations for environmental protection have not standing to annul the agency's approval of water power plant construction plan owing to damages to their environmental interest, because environment-related acts didn't prescribe their environmental interest as individual, direct, concrete interest.
But American Supreme Court decided that the plaintiff Sierra Club has standing to sue if it or its members had special interest doing leisure activities like hiking, camping, canoeing, skiing and etc. in developer's plan proposed Mineral King Valley region. I am inconvenienced by not having such judicial decision as American Sierra Club case in our country.
Whether environmental nongovernmental organization who is the third party of administrative agency's action has legal interest to sue or not depends on legislation policy.
Finally I think it is needed to confer standing to sue upon organization for environmental protection and conservation fighting for public interest to conserve the Only One Earth for future generation. But I don't deny that it is confusing question between revitalization of working for the public benefit and politicalization of judgement.
Basically environmental interest is general and collective. Our country's related acts doesn't confer standing to sue upon nongovernmental organization except consumers' protection organization and stock exchange- related organization in traditional concepts of standing. As environmental problem is related to damages of wide region, lots of adversely affected peoples and special character of public interest, the class action or action by organization is needed.
Legal issues of this case was whether neighbouring residents or environmental nongovernmental organizations who are also the third party of administrative agency's action have legal interest to sue or not. Our supreme court decided that not only neighbors who don't reside in environmental impact assessment-needed region but also citizens, mountaineers, photographers, scholars, corporations for environmental protection have not standing to annul the agency's approval of water power plant construction plan owing to damages to their environmental interest, because environment-related acts didn't prescribe their environmental interest as individual, direct, concrete interest.
But American Supreme Court decided that the plaintiff Sierra Club has standing to sue if it or its members had special interest doing leisure activities like hiking, camping, canoeing, skiing and etc. in developer's plan proposed Mineral King Valley region. I am inconvenienced by not having such judicial decision as American Sierra Club case in our country.
Whether environmental nongovernmental organization who is the third party of administrative agency's action has legal interest to sue or not depends on legislation policy.
Finally I think it is needed to confer standing to sue upon organization for environmental protection and conservation fighting for public interest to conserve the Only One Earth for future generation. But I don't deny that it is confusing question between revitalization of working for the public benefit and politicalization of judgement.
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가며
Ⅱ. 대상판결의 평석
Ⅲ. 환경단체의 원고적격에 대한 외국 판례의 동향
Ⅳ. 대상 판결의 의미
Ⅴ. 마치며
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (20)
참고문헌 신청
1. [보고서] - 김명연 / 1998 / 주민소송의 입법화 방향에 관한 연구
2. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 김철용 / 1998 / 우리나라 집단소송법의 제정을 위한 독일 공법분야의 단체소송운용실태에 대한 고찰 / 일감법학
3. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 김해룡 / 2001 / 독일과 유럽 환경법상의 단체소송제도에 관한 고찰 / 환경법연구 23 (2)
4. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 김해룡 / 2005 / 團體訴訟制度의 導入에 관한 고찰- 유럽법상의 단체소송제도와의 비교법적 관점에서 - / 환경법연구 27 (4) : 123 ~ 148
5. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 박균성 / 2000 / 프랑스법상 시설설치허가에 대한 취소소송에서 인근주민 및 환경단체의 원고적격 / 판례실무연구 (4)
2. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 김철용 / 1998 / 우리나라 집단소송법의 제정을 위한 독일 공법분야의 단체소송운용실태에 대한 고찰 / 일감법학
3. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 김해룡 / 2001 / 독일과 유럽 환경법상의 단체소송제도에 관한 고찰 / 환경법연구 23 (2)
4. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 김해룡 / 2005 / 團體訴訟制度의 導入에 관한 고찰- 유럽법상의 단체소송제도와의 비교법적 관점에서 - / 환경법연구 27 (4) : 123 ~ 148
5. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 박균성 / 2000 / 프랑스법상 시설설치허가에 대한 취소소송에서 인근주민 및 환경단체의 원고적격 / 판례실무연구 (4)
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
환경행정소송에서의 원고적격 확대와 그 한계 : 대법원 2009.9.24. 선고 2009두2825 판결에 대한 평석
서강법률논총
2014 .08
-
환경소송에 있어서 원고적격의 문제점과 해결방안
동아법학
2010 .02
-
환경행정소송과 원고적격 : 대법원 2012. 7. 5. 선고 2011두13187 판결의 비판을 중심으로
한양법학
2013 .02
-
‘낙동강 취수장 판결’로 살펴본 환경행정소송상의 원고적격 확대의 문제 : 대법원 2010. 4. 15. 선고 2007두16127 판결에 대한 평석
한양법학
2010 .08
-
환경상 이익이 관련된 지역과 원고적격
행정법연구
2012 .08
-
환경행정소송에서의 원고적격
법학논총
2018 .01
-
NGO(비정부조직, Nongovernmental organization) 외
국토
2002 .10
-
한국 환경행정소송의 최근 동향과 쟁점, 향후 과제
환경법과 정책
2011 .11
-
일본 행정소송법의 제3자의 원고적격 요건의 개정과 재판의 동향 : 우리나라 제도와 비교연구를 중심으로
동아법학
2014 .02
-
환경행정소송에서의 원고적격
행정법연구
2011 .08
-
환경행정조직 개편의 기준과 방향
한국사회과학연구
2005 .06
-
사회환경단체의 중등학교 환경클럽활동 지원사례 연구-<청소년 환경동아리 한마당>을 사례로-
환경교육
2004 .12
-
2008년 제ㆍ개정된 환경관련법률의 쟁점과 과제
강원법학
2008 .12
-
환경영향평가와 사법심사
강원법학
2006 .12
-
환경지표와 지표체계 개발
국토연구
2000 .10
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-360-018837389