Earticle

The UK’s relationship with European regionalism has always been controversial and multifaceted. Taking the UK’s relationship with the EU as well as the European human rights system of the ECHR as examples, one can argue that it is the UK’s peculiar uncodified constitution that has been a central cause for friction. The results of this friction are clear: On 23 June, 2016, a small majority of the British electorate voted in a referendum to leave the European Union. Furthermore, future domestic human rights reforms may trigger a British withdrawal from the Council of Europe. In both cases, the UK would be the first country to permanently withdraw from these postwar structures of regional cooperation. This article aims to highlight key domestic constitutional factors, which prompted a key player of European regionalism to question its own place in such a system. The British case study raises important questions especially for future architects of regional judicial cooperation, and thus may be relevant for current efforts in other regions such as Asia.

Various new measures are being presented to compel a person to perform his/her administrative obligation. Among them, the charge for compelling the performance is the means to compel an obligor to perform his/her obligation for himself/herself by imposing a monetary burden until it is fulfilled. In the sense that the charge for compelling the performance indirectly compels a person who has failed to fulfill his/her obligation to perform it for himself/herself, there exists institutional necessity for it because it can be effective means to ensure the performance of an obligation especially where other compelling measures, such as vicarious execution and direct compulsory performance, are incapacitated. However, there also exists the likelihood of infringement on the obligor's right by repeating the imposition of monetary burden continuously. Therefore, the adequacy of amount of imposition, transparency of imposition process, predictability, and the standardization of process including warning, grant of sufficient time for fulfillment, and provision of an opportunity to submit opinion should be ensured, and the means for rapid remedy of the right should be secured where any wrongful charge for compelling the performance has been imposed. Hence, this paper reviews the changes in the introduction process, legal significance and characteristics of the charge for compelling the performance, and, on the basis of which, proposes issues on and improvement direction of the charge for compelling the performance. It is the fact that with respect to the charge for compelling the performance as means for securing the efficiency of administration, no standardized public law exists, and it is provided for in each respective statute with no coherent system even under the individual law. The charge for compelling the performance which is an unfavorable disposition should be legislatively preceded by systematic and predicable lawful procedures and judicial remedy suggested in the legal principles of the Administrative Procedures Act.

Since the IMF’s bailout of South Korea in 1997, the number of homeless people in Korea has increased both quantitatively and qualitatively, and the Welfare Act for Homelessness was enacted in 2012. The law integrates measures for the existing vagrants and homeless persons and the delivery system therefor, and classifies the homeless facilities by functional status to further specialize and systemize services. However, it is questioned whether this law, which is only in the initial stage, can be realized in the open according to the purpose of the law. In this regard, this study aims to explore the implications of the homelessness system in Northern Europe where the homeless delivery system is well organized, like in Sweden and Finland. Globally, there are two homeless delivery system models. Namely, the Staircase model and the Housing First model. The Staircase model has evolved considerably in Sweden as a system to gradually normalize the functioning of the homeless. The Housing First model provides homeless people with an independent housing space first. Finland is currently receiving national attention for its best practices. Many countries are providing services based on these two delivery system models, and the current trend is shifting from the Staircase model to the Housing First model. Korea is implementing a system close to the Staircase model, albeit in its initial stages, and the Housing First model is not suitable for the realities of Korea. In order for Korea to have a more efficient delivery system, it is necessary to combine these two models to provide services that can secure facilities such as an independent residential space and better meet the needs of the homeless.

This study is the first effort to compare in detail the laws and rules in Korea and Germany concerning business startups for the unemployed. It advances the hypothesis that German law on business startups for the unemployed well differentiates the policy supporting business startups for a diverse group of unemployed people, while Korean law on startups does not consider the unemployed in this way. The reason is that German society is established according to discipline of the social market economy, based on Ordoliberalism. It promotes fair competition by regulatory policy, while Korea does not have a comparable social discipline. Analyzing Social Code Book II, III and the Act on the Management of Investment Fund of the European Recovery Programme (Germany), and the Employment Insurance Act, its Enforcement Decree and the Operational Rules for Projects for Business Startups by the Unemployed, this study can verify such hypothesis. Statute clauses on startup allowances; counseling and training related to business startups; and financing for startups provide for different policies for groups of unemployed who are placed in a different social and economic situation. These differential polices may promote fair competition for the unemployed people in diverse situations, while Korean laws do not consider such a position.

In highly complex cities of today, people have no choice but to rely on the administration activities in all aspects of insurance of basic necessities as well as human rights, maintenance of wellbeing and systems, and preservation of a clean environment. In this situation, administration is required to be more proactive and aggressive rather than post-factum. In addition, as various desires for administration are increasing, the means and effects of achieving administrative goals have important significance. As long as we fail to ensure effective means to rectify and prevent violation or breach of administrative obligations, it is impossible to conduct the duties placed on the administration today. Therefore, the issuers of administration orders the duties by the law directly or by the administration dispositions under the law towards the recipients of administration to achieve administrative goals and when the object of administration fulfills the duty, the administrative objective is achieved. However, when the object of administration fails to fulfill the duty, the subject of administration should ensure the fulfillment of duties through means of enforcement to realize the administration goal and effectiveness of administration laws. The new means to insure the effectiveness of administration bear certain problems and limitations. In addition, if the administration demands and requests that are increasing, becoming diversified and complicated, are not fulfilled, a new administrative means to ensure effectiveness is introduced. Those new means involve surcharges, compensation, and additional payment. These have positive aspects to ensure the effectiveness of administration, and at the same time, become problematic legally and its allowance in imposing the relationship with other legal systems. Where allowing, the problem of procedural rules and means of redemption should be taken into consideration. Therefore, this study examines the significance and its legal characteristics of the surcharge system and Compensation introduced as the means to ensure effectiveness in administration laws and the status of the surcharge system as a means of regulation; and explores similar systems in terms of legal issues and Supreme Court decisions.