조세불복사건 판단에 있어 인지 편향과 극복방안

Abstract

Humans acquired heuristics for survival. Heuristics are mental shortcuts that save time by simplifying complex decisions into simple rules of thumb. Heuristics are useful in everyday life because they enable us to automatically make quick decisions with little effort. However, when making important decisions and legal judgments, heuristics can be dangerous. Before filing a lawsuit in an appeals proceeding against a taxation, it must be needed to file an administrative appeal. It is the procedure enforced by law. Administrative hearings is similar to the judicial proceedings. The evaluating of the weight of proof depends on the committee members just as the judge. The problem is that the judge could make wrong decision due to his or her cognitive bias. In the United States, many experimental studies have been conducted on jurors and judges to see if various heuristics actually occur. It is important for parties to accept the legal decision, so that the legal decision must not be biased.
 The purpose of this research is to analyze the cases that had been shown heuristics in administrative trial decisions and to research on debiasing. This paper analyzes decisions in which representativeness heuristics, hindsight bias, and confirmation bias appeared. In order to debiase, there are several trials like the cognitive correction(thinking the opposite etc.), environmental correction(reducing cognitive losses etc.), and systemic correction(decision support systems etc.).