인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록·키워드
In December 2021, Korean Constitutional Court upheld the constitutionality of Art. 25. Sec. 1 of the Employment of Foreign Workers Act, which restricts the reasons for changing workplace of foreign workers, and Articles 4 and 5 of the Ministry of Employment and Labor’s Notification. It was considered that restricting the reason and number of times foreign worker’s right to change workplaces under the EPS(Employment Permit System) did not infringe on the freedom of occupation and the right to work under the constitution for policy reasons.
However, seeking another job to reject the current poor working conditions, regardless of the worker’s national origin is essentially a matter of right to work. It is an essential legal and analytical task to closely examine the subjectivity and content of migrant workers’ right to work, and reconstruct it on a rights-based approach.
With this perspective in mind, this article develops discussions in the following order. First, after summarizing the main contents of the 2021 Constitutional Court’s decision on Article 25 (1) of the Foreign Employment Act (II), the existing Constitutional Court’s decision, centered on foreigners’ ‘right to work’, as well as other court’s decisions that were discussed, and describe their limitations and problems (III). Next, an analysis is conducted to clarify the nature and content of the right to work. In addition to various academic interpretations of working rights under the Korean Constitution, the content and interpretation of working rights referred to in international norms, including the UN Social Rights Treaty, are explained (IV). After that, based on the legal and theoretical understanding of the right to work, it is applied to the contents of the current Foreign Employment Act and foreign-related rulings, including the Constitutional Court’s decision, and suggests the correct direction of interpretation of foreigners’ right to work (V).
However, seeking another job to reject the current poor working conditions, regardless of the worker’s national origin is essentially a matter of right to work. It is an essential legal and analytical task to closely examine the subjectivity and content of migrant workers’ right to work, and reconstruct it on a rights-based approach.
With this perspective in mind, this article develops discussions in the following order. First, after summarizing the main contents of the 2021 Constitutional Court’s decision on Article 25 (1) of the Foreign Employment Act (II), the existing Constitutional Court’s decision, centered on foreigners’ ‘right to work’, as well as other court’s decisions that were discussed, and describe their limitations and problems (III). Next, an analysis is conducted to clarify the nature and content of the right to work. In addition to various academic interpretations of working rights under the Korean Constitution, the content and interpretation of working rights referred to in international norms, including the UN Social Rights Treaty, are explained (IV). After that, based on the legal and theoretical understanding of the right to work, it is applied to the contents of the current Foreign Employment Act and foreign-related rulings, including the Constitutional Court’s decision, and suggests the correct direction of interpretation of foreigners’ right to work (V).
본문·목차
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
