Abstract
This article begins with a fundamental question about the level of qualifications required by the qualification system and conducts a constitutional review of the unconstitutionality of the quota system selection method in the qualification system. While the qualification system is essentially intended to evaluate qualifications and abilities, the quota system is seen as being determined by a complex combination of social demands and other interests. However, in the 2008 Heonba 110 decision, the Constitutional Court ruled that the quota system (relative evaluation) selection method under the bar examination system did not violate the principle of prohibition of excess, and this article examines the arguments of the existing Constitutional Court decision to discuss the various qualification systems currently in progress. In this regard, the intention was to proceed with a constitutional explanation regarding the quota system. In the main text, the review criteria for freedom of occupational choice are identified as a prerequisite, the German three-stage theory and the Constitutional Court are compared and reviewed, and then the Constitutional Court decision is reviewed. In conclusion, this article believes that the quota selection method contains objective factors that are unrelated to the ability or talent of the person involved. Even if some subjective reasons are acknowledged, it would be necessary to conduct a more rigorous review of the restrictions on occupational choice in the case, at least in the sense that objective reasons are also present. Furthermore, as a result of a new review of the Constitutional Court's argument, we looked at the quota system from the perspective that it violates the principle of prohibition of excess and has the potential to infringe on occupational freedom. In order to reduce the unconstitutionality of the quorum system, it is believed that there is a need to reform the qualification system by at least incorporating the method of absolute evaluation so that it can be objectively recognized as a verification to evaluate ability or qualifications.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.