Laws are written in general and abstract terms to apply to a wide range of matters, and literal, historical, and purposive methods of interpretation are used to apply them to specific cases. It also utilizes analogies and jurisprudential norms to fill in the gaps in the law, and it is important to reflect social changes and the needs of the times.
Law is stated in general and abstract normative propositions so that it can be applied to as many concrete cases as possible. Therefore, in order to apply the law to specific cases, it is necessary to interpret the law to clarify its content and determine its scope of application. There are two types of legal interpretation methods: constitutional interpretation by state institutions such as the legislature, judiciary, and executive branch, and academic interpretation through academic research by scholars. Among them, literary interpretation, historical interpretation, and purposive interpretation are traditionally utilized in relation to academic interpretation.
First of all, the interpretation of legal texts should be based on the grammatical understanding of the meaning of the characters used in the legal text and the structure of the sentence. This interpretation is called the grammatical interpretation method. Any statutory text should be interpreted in this way initially. However, care must be taken when interpreting the law because the meaning of a letter or legal term in a statutory text is often different from its ordinary meaning. And because the meaning of a law must be determined in relation to the specific realities to which it applies, it is appropriate to interpret the meaning of the words used in a statutory provision as they exist today, not as they existed when the law was enacted.
The historical method of interpretation seeks to identify and explore the legislative intent of the legislator at the time of enactment. The legislator’s legislative intent can be determined by looking at the history of the legal system, or by looking at the legislative foundation materials, such as the bill’s reasons for proposing the bill, legislative opinions from relevant organizations, and meeting minutes. However, the circumstances under which laws are enacted are often very different from those under which they are applied, so the legislative intent of the legislator can only be a non-binding aid rather than a definitive means of interpretation.
Purposive interpretation is a method of interpretation in which the subject of interpretation finds the meaning of the law based on rational discussion within the current legal order, taking into account the meaning of the legal text, the purpose of the legislation, the ideology and values pursued through the legislation, and the perception and analysis of the current situation. According to this purposive method of interpretation, the interpretation of law is not merely to repeat what the legislator has already considered in the past, but to reveal the purpose of the legislation anew according to the situation. Since the true meaning of the law is not determined by past legislation, but rather by inheriting the spirit of the legislation to suit the current situation, the text of the law should be interpreted flexibly beyond simple semantic interpretation. In addition, interpretations of the law that are not strictly bound by the text of the law are recognized in order to supplement the text of the law according to the spirit of the law and realize the spirit of the law when necessary.
These methods are generally utilized in cases where there is a clear statutory provision applicable to a matter requiring legal judgment. However, the legal concepts and categories that make up a legal text cannot fully encompass all the various phenomena and behaviors that are subject to regulation. It is also not possible to anticipate and regulate all possible future events at the time of enactment. This leads to problems in the application of the law, which are referred to as flaws in the law. When there is no obvious rule of law to govern a matter, it is called a “manifest defect,” and when there is a rule of law to govern a matter, it is called a “concealed defect” because it leads to a highly unreasonable result. Since judges cannot refuse to try cases based on these flaws in the law, various methods are utilized to fill in the gaps in the law.
One common method is analogy. Analogy is the application of a separate rule, other than a directly applicable rule, to the case at issue. In order for a legal decision to be legal and valid, there must first be a statute that governs a similar issue to the one at issue, and there must be a substantial similarity between the two issues. Finally, there must be a judicial determination that the analogy provides a plausible resolution to the question at issue.
While analogy is commonly utilized as a way to fill in the gaps in the law, it is essentially just an alternative to filling in the gaps in the express law. Because of this, the results of analogies have the limitation that their legitimacy must be evaluated through a separate method, such as purposive interpretation. In addition, because flaws in the law are often hidden, judges must find ways to fill in the gaps in the law. In this regard, scholars believe that judges can fill in the gaps by utilizing jurisprudential norms such as justice, reason, and equity as the basis for legal judgment. These principles are presented as a way for judges to approach problem-solving in a rational manner while controlling their arbitrariness in matters requiring legal judgment. However, it is also true that judges cannot completely eliminate emotional or arbitrary judgments, and it is therefore necessary to minimize the flaws in the law as much as possible as a matter of legislative policy.
To compensate for the flaws in the law, it is important not only to consider the intent and purpose of the legislator, but also to reflect the changes and developments in society. Modern society is changing rapidly, and these changes may give rise to new legal issues. Therefore, it is important for judges to reflect social changes and the needs of the times when interpreting and applying the law, so as to ensure that the law is flexible while maintaining legal stability. This means that the interpretation of the law is not limited to the letter of the law, but requires a comprehensive approach that takes into account the spirit and purpose of the law. For example, legal issues arising from the development of new technologies may not be adequately addressed within the existing legal framework. In such cases, judges must interpret and apply the law to the new situation to find a fair and reasonable solution.
Therefore, in the process of interpreting and applying the law, it is important for judges to go beyond the literal meaning of the law, understand the purpose and spirit of the law, and make appropriate legal judgments based on the specific case. This is essential for building a legal system that responds to changing social needs while maintaining legal stability and predictability. Such a comprehensive and flexible approach to the interpretation and application of the law will play an important role in filling gaps in the law and providing fair and reasonable legal solutions.
