Earticle

A state of emergency is a governmental declaration that announces that the country is in a state of emergency. This means that the government can suspend and/or change some functions of the executive, the legislative and or the judiciary during this period of time. It alerts citizens to change their normal behaviour and orders government agencies to implement emergency plans. A government can declare a state of emergency during a time of natural or man-made disaster, during a period of civil unrest, or following a declaration of war or situation of international/internal armed conflict. Justitium is its equivalent in Roman law. Material Law a nation's emergency competence has worked out as a means in history to maintain national peace and social order. Such function and values are still valid nowadays, and the basic aim of the law is not defaced. However, there is also a problem that the material law in force now does not reflect the current times. It has been more than 20years since the law was revised. Since the realistic situation has changed so much all the while, it is necessary to revise the law reflecting the real world, wether the system is used frequently or not. Further, articles concerning the material law have many problems within, in the relationship with basic human rights. Constitution in Force now states the material law in article 77. Material law is stated with two categories of extraordinary and precautionary material law. The material law in force now is stated based on constitution. It has been revised 4 times. But the law in force now still has many problems. First, the condition to proclaim the material law is not certain. Second, the president must get consent from the assembly after the proclamation of material law, but it's more effective to get prior consent to control material law. Lastly, the law has possibility to impose excessive restriction on people's fundamental rights. Therefore, the law has to be revised to resolve those problems. It can also be used as a rationale for suspending rights and freedoms, even if those rights and freedoms are guaranteed under the Constitution. Some countries do not have an embedded Constitution such as the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Israel. Legislation covers a state of emergency in these countries. Under the protocol of the ICCPR, rights and freedoms may be suspended during a state of emergency, for example, a government can detain citizens and hold them without trial. All rights that can be derogated from are listed in the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights. Some sources argue that non-derogable rights cannot be suspended. However this theory is contested. Emergency law does and can override non-derogatory rights during a state of emergency.

The fundamental purpose of the confirmation hearing system is to restrain the right of personnel management of the president on the high-ranking government posts by the national representative institution of the National Assembly. The problems of the current confirmation hearing system operation are the short period of the confirmation hearing, dual hearing procedures, insufficient sanctions on candidate's falsehood statement, no submission of data, non-attendance of a witness, hearing operation focused on morality verification and instrumentation of the confirmation hearing by the ruling party and the opposition parties. Since the introduction of the confirmation hearing system in 2000, as the Park Geun Hye administration launched and the president as the appointer appointed high-ranking government posts, officers who declined the posts before they attended the confirmation hearing of the National Assembly, the national representative institution increased, the Blue House and the ruling party demand the improvement of the dual operation for closed verification of morality and the National Assembly open verification of policy verification with the claim 'No confirmation hearing for excessive interference of privacy.' Further more, President, Park Geun Hye, blames the confirmation hearing system for the failure due to preliminary verification insufficiency and attributes the responsibility to the opposition party and the press. On the other hand, it shows 180 degree different attitude toward the speech before and after assuming the reins of government about the confirmation hearing. As for the current confirmation hearing system, the positions about the expansion of the confirmation hearing objects or introduction have been changed according to political positions of the position changes of the ruling and opposition parties but it has independent historicity as a system introduced through 'national argument' to solve the problems of self-conscious execution of the right of personnel management in the process to appoint high-ranking government posts that have repeated even since democratization. Consequently, the recent 'Reform of the Confirmation Hearing System' that can cause the actually helpless condition of the confirmation hearing as well as the uselessness of the confirmation hearing is against the purpose of introduction to the current confirmation hearing and furthe rmore, anti-constitutional claim and anti-historical conception. The American confirmation hearing is dealing with morality as important as official position performance ability such as job eligibility of the senior official. Since introduction of the confirmation hearing in 2000, it is the thought of the people that when the quality and morality of the senior officer is evaluated, higher verification criteria should be applied. A senior officer who is of loose morality can not perform his job. In addition, the performance of official duties by a senior officer without morality is not trusted by the people. The be havior only increases the distrust of the people. Higher morality of a senior officer can not be emphasized too much.

Urbanization triggers not only securing of residental space but also demand that pursues life in comfortable living space. But high-rise and close-set buildings caused by the cityward tendency of the population bring out limit of sunshine amount and increasing of dispute of right to enjoy sunshine follows. Constitutional base of this right to enjoy sunshine protection can appear. But in contrast with other social fundamental rights, environmental right has limit to deduce of main agent of environmental right, so detailed parts of dispute of right to enjoy sunshine remain province of the judiciary. The judiciary resolves dispute connected with right to enjoy sunshine according to the limit of admission. Even though that the judiciary entirely makes decision the dispute of right to enjoy sunshine which comes into acute benefits and values is distance from present dispute resolution trend of settlement out of court , this is unavoidable phenomenon in the situation that theorization as specific and realistic right to enjoy sunshine does not completed. We should be conscious of the fact that definite fundamental rights about the right to enjoy sunshine and organization of the right related to enjoy sunshine are solution for reduction of social economic cost caused by the dispute right to enjoy sunshine.

A special law for consumer protection regulates right to withdraw of consumers. This right is different from the right to withdraw in Civil Law. And consumers can exercise this right unquestioningly in a certain period. Payment of each contractor has to return to the or iginal state in the effect of exercising of the right. By the way, during the period between payment and withdraw, consumers may obtain any benefits or profits from using of objects. This is called profits of using. Provider may suffer a loss from no returning of this profit. But the legal ground for the returning of profits is not clear. First, compensation for damages is considered. But it can't be accepted that the profits of using is returned to provider by the principle of compensation for damages. Because a loss of provider is not an damage. Second, unjust enrichment is considered. But this also can’t be possible beca use of the lack of requirements. Therefore it must be established in the system of each special law. And the legal basis that profits of using from consumer’s right to withdraw can be returned to provider has to be arranged.

It researched into general suicide, suicide in life insurance and indemnity of suicide between Korea and other countries. The rate of suicide in Korea is ranked first highest among the OECD members. Korea government has tried to decrease the rate of suicide across the board in the society. Generally, the suicide doesn't have contingency required in the insurance. thus it is principle that the suicide is not acknowledged as the insured accident. But most countries including Korea state the term of the immunity from responsibility in order to protect the bereaved family and concerned person. For reasons of raising the rate of suicide, the life insurance companies insist on the postponement of payment. Also, The insurance consumer, such as insurant and insurance beneficiary, strongly insist against the opinion of life insurance companies. In this thesis, the author examines definite standard of suicide, immunity on suicide caused by insanity and postponed term of immunity, other than those things. other than those, there are a lot of things else which we need to consider. it is a difficult case to judge from the simple statistics, such as the rate of suicide, term of immunity, payment of insurance money and so on, It needs more effort to ameliorate this situation with policy correspond to current situation and various theoretical approaches.

Endangering offense(Gefahrdungsdelikt) prescribed in the Penal Code are would extend the range of the severe punishment because it has possibility which is punished by the occurrence of the risk, because the punishment can be severe punishment can extend the range, and violates the replacement of the Criminal Code and s the principle of clarity. In particular, the realization of constituent acts as a slight distortion of the case by case Punishment on summary conviction to a misdemeanor charged to the decriminalizing, but rather punishment endangering offense this serious distortion of the constitutional liberty and the right to a speedy trial or other legal interests, such as might be violated. In order to overcome these concerns must be oriented specifically Endangering offense, and abstract Endangering offense should be excluded in the realm of the Criminal Code. If it is estimated the risk of crime, corresponding approach is prevention and stop. And the stage which places Act infringement and public danger the criminal law should be a last resort. For this purpose, properly and powerful tool respond to the risk of crime should be granted to police. In addition, public safety, as well as the individual's life, health, property with an emphasis on the protection of the Police Act specifically police authority trigger should be set in the range. In addition, the police act with an emphasis on the protection of public safety, as well as the individual's life, health, property should be set in the range of specifically police authority trigger. So it protects the human rights and should be based on fair enforcement execution.

It is a tendency of a judicial precedent that the collateralizing debt existing material check lawsuit and the erasion lawsuit of the Kun registration of settlement of mortgage are interpreted as the independent claim which may have influence mutually and does not have influence between claims. There is necessity which must solve the problem whether it must be consistent on a code of legal procedure, and must reflect the relation on a substantive law after all, and I think that I will solve such a problem through this incident judicial precedent. If registration of settlement of mortgage is erased, a debt to be collateralized will be opposed to holding of the Supreme Court that it is not an object of the check lawsuit by the past legal relation. It is judged that the lawsuit of checking the debt about the upper flexible mortgage to be collateralized not existing by the premise that the fact that the secured claim of the flexible mortgage was repaid to the judicial precedent of this incident was accepted, and, as for the flexible mortgage, it already disappeared was related with your father of the past legal relation. the obligation to the superior root mortgage in the case of the creditor keeping documents, such as a bill at debt, as usual from the time of a setup, or asserting this to be collateralized cannot be said to be the past legal relation. If the present judicial precedent which can be interpreted as the profits of the collateralizing debt existing reconfirmation being accepted in such a case, and the tendency of a theory are followed even if it calls it the past legal relation, this incident Supreme Court judicial precedent must have change which slips out of a judicial precedent conventionally.