http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : Thomas C. Adriaenssens (검색결과 3 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
Thomas C. Adriaenssens 한국법제연구원 2024 KLRI journal of law and legislation Vol.14 No.1
South Korea has been ruled by authoritarian regimes for most of its post war history, until democratization in the late 1980s. During this period, violence by the state against its citizens was common. Although the 2005 Framework Act on Settling the Past set up a Truth Commission to investigate and shed light on past wrongdoings, it lacked provisions on compensation. This forced victims to either litigate for redress or mobilize politically for the enactment of compensation laws. For many victims, rules of evidence and the statute of limitations frustrated attempts to find justice through the courts, resulting in an emphasis on redress legislation over litigation. Yet, such legislation often limited itself to specific incidents or categories of victims and thereby disadvantaged other victims. Unlike previous research, this work approached redress legislation holistically. It aimed to provide an overview of compensation laws for victims of domestic state violence during South Korea’s authoritarian period (roughly 1948-1993). It first formulated criteria to assess which victims could, to what extent, achieve redress through compensation law. It then used these criteria to find sixteen relevant acts and ordinances to analyze. It found that these laws could function to restrict access to redress by limiting government liability, lacked uniform terminology, and did not treat like cases alike. It also observed that the current configuration of compensation legislation suggests a hierarchy of victimhood that disadvantages non-ideal victims like women, people with disabilities, people with non-physical injuries, and workers. South Korea has been ruled by authoritarian regimes for most of its post war history, until democratization in the late 1980s. During this period, violence by the state against its citizens was common. Although the 2005 Framework Act on Settling the Past set up a Truth Commission to investigate and shed light on past wrongdoings, it lacked provisions on compensation. This forced victims to either litigate for redress or mobilize politically for the enactment of compensation laws. For many victims, rules of evidence and the statute of limitations frustrated attempts to find justice through the courts, resulting in an emphasis on redress legislation over litigation. Yet, such legislation often limited itself to specific incidents or categories of victims and thereby disadvantaged other victims. Unlike previous research, this work approached redress legislation holistically. It aimed to provide an overview of compensation laws for victims of domestic state violence during South Korea’s authoritarian period (roughly 1948-1993). It first formulated criteria to assess which victims could, to what extent, achieve redress through compensation law. It then used these criteria to find sixteen relevant acts and ordinances to analyze. It found that these laws could function to restrict access to redress by limiting government liability, lacked uniform terminology, and did not treat like cases alike. It also observed that the current configuration of compensation legislation suggests a hierarchy of victimhood that disadvantages non-ideal victims like women, people with disabilities, people with non-physical injuries, and workers.
-
-
하도마(Thomas C. Adriaenssens) 한국사회보장법학회 2022 사회보장법학 Vol.11 No.1
2020 글로벌 연금 지수(Mercer CFA Institute Global Pension Index)에 따르면 네덜란드 노후소득보장법제는 세계에서 최고 노후소득보장제도이다. 「노후 일반법(Algemene Ouderdomswet)」은 거의 무조건적인 ‘기본소득’으로 모든 노인에게 공적연금을 제공하고 있다. 「연금법(Pensioenwet)」은 동종업종의 산별퇴직연금기금(bedrijfstakpensioenfonds) 혹은 단일회사의 기업퇴직연금기금(ondernemingspensioenfonds)을 규제하고 있다. 이에 비해 한국의 노후소득보장제도는 상대적으로 낮은 31위에 그쳤다. 따라서 네덜란드 노후소득보장법제의 검토를 통해 한국의 노후소득보장법제에 시사점과 개선점이 제공될 수 있다. 하지만 아직까지 언어 장벽으로 인해 해당 검토는 이루어지지 못한 것으로 보인다. 본 글은 네덜란드 노후소득보장법제의 전개 과정과 어떻게 그 법제가 노후소득보장제도의 적절성, 지속가능성과 완전성을 장려했는지 법사학적으로 검토하고자 한다. 본 논문은 먼저 네덜란드의 공적 및 사적 연금 규제의 역사를 개략적으로 설명한다. 이후 「노후일반법」과 「연금법」의 주요 내용을 개관한다. 마지막으로 이를 한국 제도와 비교하고 시사점을 제공한다. The Dutch retirement pension system is recognized as one of the best pension systems in the world according to the Mercer Global Pension Index. On the one hand, the General Old Age Act (AOW) provides a public pension that gives a near unconditional ‘basic income’ to the elderly. On the other hand, the Pension Act regulates the operation of occupational pensions, both the big industry-wide funds (bedrijfstakpensioenfonds) and the smaller company pension funds (ondernemingspensioenfonds). However, South Koreas system of Old Age Income Security scores relatively low on the index. Thus, examining the Dutch system provides valuable insights in how Korea can improve her system of old age income security, something that has not happened yet due to the language barrier. This paper takes a legal history approach to examine how this system came into being and how these laws encourage the adequacy, sustainability, and integrity of the system. This paper first sketches the history of the regulation of public and private pensions in the Netherlands (2). It then gives a more in-depth description of the AOW (3) and the Pension Act (5), before briefly making a comparison with South Korea (6).
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
