You are on page 1of 22

- 403 -

---
1---2
3
4

(87/10/28)

5
--
6 7
1
2
3
4
5
6

1
51
85
127

- 404 -

--
8

(87/10/28)

--

9
7

8
9

109
(87/10/28)

- 405 -

10

11
(minimum requirements)

12

10

11
12

4 127 160

4 127 161

- 406 -

13

(duty to act fairly)

15

16

(84/02/10)17
18

14

15

16
17

13
14

4 127 161~164

- 407 -

18

103 1041999 6

17
104

(89/05/19)
(89/05/19)

- 408 -

22

1920

21
(89/05/19)

23

24

22

23
19
20

21

88 3000 (88/06/30)

3 85

- 409 -

24

84 45512 (84/12/28)

1996 1 31

- 410 -

25

2627

(ex parte contacts)


(formal adjudication)

(formal rulemaking)
(valuable privilege)

25

15 104
3261999 5

- 411 -

26

27

See 5 U.S.C. 557(d); Action for Childrens Television v. FCC, 546 F. 2d 458
(D.C.Cir. 1977); Sierra Club v. Costle, 657 F. 2d 298 (D.C.Cir. 1981).
1 1 18

- 412 -

(right to be informed)
2829

30

28

29

30

- 413 -

(prior/advanced notice)

31
32
---
---
33

34

31
32
33

34

- 414 -

35
36

37

38

40

39

35
36
37

38

39

- 415 -

41
42
40
41
42

- 416 -

43

(1)
49

4445
464748

43

44

45
46

47

5 U.S.C. 706(2)
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5) 556557
(substantial
evidence)
(6)
3 85 95~101

- 417 -

(2)

48

49

- 418 -

50

51

50

- 419 -

- 420 -

51

52

53

52

53

(right to be heard, right to hearing)

(right to hearing/ right to be heard)

54

1.
Henry Friendly Some
Kind of Hearing55(elements of a fair
hearing)
1) (an unbiased tribunal)

- 421 -

2) (notice of the proposed action


and the grounds asserted for it)
3) (opportunity to
54
55

1 1
Friendly, Some Kind of Hearing, 123 U. PA. L. REV 1267, 1279~1304 (1975).

- 422 -

present reasons why the proposed action should not be taken)


4) (right to present evidence,
including the right to call witnesses)
5) (right to know opposing evidence)
6)(right to have decision based
only on the evidence presented)
7) (right of cross-examination)
8) (right to counsel)
9) (making of a record and a statement of
reasons)
10) (public attendance)
2.

(both sides shall


be heard, Audi alteram partem) 57

56

(trade-off)

58

-- 59

60
61

(procedural formality)

62

58

56

57

Trompier Gravier
(droits de la dfense)

787 9182000 3
R. v. Chancellor of Cambridge University (1723) 1 Star. 557, at 567.
,cited in JRGEN
SCHWARZE, EUROPEAN ADMINSTRATIVE LAW 1244(1992).

- 423 -

59
60

61

62

- 424 -

63
64
6566
67
68

what process is due

(minimum procedural requirements)

(hybrid)69

1.

70

71
69

63
64
65
66
67
68

2 51 71~74

- 425 -

70

71

56 900~902

- 426 -

72

(von Amts
Wegan, Inguisitorial principle)73

74

2.

75

7677

78
79

75

72

73

74

- 427 -

76
77

78

79

439

- 428 -

1)80

1.

1)

2)81
3)82
4)83
5)84

85

2)
3)

80
81
82

2.

83

- 429 -

84

85

- 430 -

86

87

88

87

86

639 694~698
1993 5

- 431 -

88

830 4929 1
1282 1 601997 5 7

- 432 -

89

90
91

92
93

1)

94
2)
9596
97
3)98

89

90

91
92

93

25 333~334
1165~11661999 12

- 433 -

94
95

96

97

98

- 434 -

99100
4)101

5)102
103104

7)107
108109
110
8)

111112

6)105
106
107

100

101

102

103

104

105

106

108

109

110

111

on
the record

- 435 -

- 436 -

99

9)113
114115
10)116
117

56 794823

112

113

114

115

116

117

- 437 -

(duty to give reasons)

(reasoning, Begrndung)

- 438 -

118

119

120

121

(standards of judicial review)


(Kontrolldichte)---(arbitrary and capricious
test)(hard-look test)
(substantial evidence test)

--- (administrative
records)
122

1)

2)

3)

123

124

118

122

119

123

120

121
3 85

- 439 -

3 85

124

- 440 -

1)

2)

3)

127~1412000
6 2003 8

- 441 -

65

55-I
& III

68

67-II

75-II

55,
56-II

109

61,
62-II-1

125-III

61,
62-II-1

125-III

46

49-I
46

32, 37

24-I,
49-I
55-I-5

66-I-4

61

154-I

64, 128,
58-II
129
108-I
67-III

188-I

- 443 -

54-II

- 444 -

55
97-I-4

97-I-4

32-I-3&4

52, 53
97-I-3

47-I
47-IIIII

1.
2.
65
91, 92

56, 63-I

63-II & III


66

68
67-II
75-II
32, 37
66-I-4
54-II

97-I-2
67-III

89-II

89-I-3
90

110-I


1. 91-I & II
2. 92-I & II
3. 91, 92

- 445 -