Earticle

초록

영어

The country’s current lawsuit system is centered on protest suits and party suits, which are subjective lawsuits, not only in the area of civil suits but also in that of administrative litigations. Under such a system, only the party whose legal interest is infringed can raise a lawsuit based on an individualistic philosophy. However, it is necessary for people to maintain stricter control and watch over environment- or consumer-related administrative matters or invasions of state finance, i.e., taxpayers’ money, through false claims, under the current lawsuit system centered on subjective lawsuits, as the said matters have little to do with individuals’ subjective interest. As for public administration-related matters, which have a close relationship with individuals’ interests, private lawsuits filed by individuals to protect their interests may work to control them, but public administration-related matters that do not (i.e., that are purely of a public nature) are likely to be left to the public administration’s self-regulation, which means they remain outside the people’s efficient control. This is a result of the country’s lawsuit system being based on an individualistic philosophy. No one will dispute that the purpose of public administration (or administrative law) is the realization of the public good.
Under a false-claims law, non-stake-holding, ordinary people, either alone on behalf of the state or jointly with the Justice Minister, may file a lawsuit against a party that has inflicted losses or damages on the government by fraudulent means and may be paid part of the money recovered from such a party asa reward. Looking at the United States, the amount of government budget recovered through the Qui Tam lawsuits filed under The False Claims Act came to $58 billion in the 1987~2010 period. It also has the effect of preventing budgetary waste. The Act was amended twice in 2009 and 2010 following an overall amendment in 1986 with the aim of achieving greater efficiency as a strong tool against false claims.

목차

Ⅰ. 국가재정침해사례 속출
 Ⅱ. 국가재정침해의 강력한 대응수단으로써 Qui Tam Action
  1. 「부정」요건의 중요성
  2. 부정청구법제의 성립과 경향
 Ⅲ. 도입에 따른 개별 분야별 효과
  1. 재정분야
  2. 공공분야
  3. 민간분야
 Ⅳ. 우리나라에서 부정청구법의 도입 필요성
  1. 도덕적 해이의 극복
  2. 재정부실의 극복을 위한 공익소송의 도입 필요
  3. 정책법원으로서 법원
  4. 주관적 권리구제소송의 한계
  5. 객관적 공익소송 도입의 필요성
  6. 국내 부정청구관련 법률의 미비
 Ⅴ. 결론
 [참고문헌]
 

키워드

저자

• 박세훈 [ Park, Se-Hun | 한국법제연구원 초청연구원, 법학박사 ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물

표지보기 관심저널 등록

• 간행물명

  비교법연구 [The Journal of Comparative Law]

• 간기

  연3회

• pISSN

  1598-3285

• 수록기간

  2000~2026

• 십진분류

  KDC 360 DDC 340