표제지

목차

제1장 들어가며 4

제1절 연구의 목적 4

제2절 연구의 범위 및 방법·구성 5

1. 연구의 범위 5

2. 연구의 방법 5

3. 논문의 구성 6

제2장 선거공영제에 대한 이론적 배경 7

제1절 선거공영제의 의의 7

1. 선거공영제의 개념 7

2. 선거공영제의 이론적 배경 8

3. 선거공영제의 유형 11

제2절 한국의 정치자금 조달방법 15

1. 보조금 17

2. 당비 26

3. 후원회 29

4. 기탁금 35

제3절 외국의 선거공영제 운영현황 38

1. 주요 국가의 선거공영제 운영현황 38

2. 주요국가 제도와의 비교 40

제3장 한국의 선거운동방법별 선거공영제 운용실태 42

제1절 선거운동관계자의 선거운동 43

제2절 인쇄물에 의한 선거운동 45

1. 선거벽보 45

2. 선거공보 48

3. 선거공약서 49

4. 명함 50

제3절 시설물에 의한 선거운동 51

1. 선거사무소(선거연락소)설치 간판·현판 등 51

2. 가두게시 현수막 51

제4절 대중매체를 이용한 선거운동 52

1. 신문광고 52

2. 방송광고 53

3. 방송연설 54

4. 경력방송 56

제5절 공개장소에서의 연설·대담을 통한 선거운동 57

제6절 대담·토론을 이용한 선거운동 59

1. 언론기관의 후보자 등 초청 대담·토론회 59

2. 단체의 후보자 등 초청 대담·토론회 60

3. 선거방송토론위원회 주관 대담·토론회 61

제7절 정보통신망을 이용한 선거운동 62

1. 전화에 의한 선거운동 62

2. 전자우편 전송 63

제4장 한국의 선거공영제에 대한 문제점 및 개선방안 64

제1절 선거비용 보전제도 개선 64

1. 선거비용 총액보전제 도입 64

2. 선거비용 및 보전비용 중복지원 개선 65

3. 보전비용의 지방자치단체 부담 해소 67

4. 법정선거비용 인정대상 확대 69

5. 선거비용 보전요건 개선 71

6. 보전비용 보전대상 확대 72

제2절 선거운동제도의 합리적 개선 73

1. 돈 선거의 요인이 되는 선거운동방법 축소 73

2. 돈이 적게 드는 선거운동방법의 최대한 보장 78

3. 홍보효과가 높은 선거운동방법에 대한 국고지원 확대 81

제3절 국고보조금 제도의 개선 83

1. 보조금 증액절차 개선 84

2. 보조금 배분방식 개선 87

3. 보조금에 대한 통제강화 91

4. 보조금 감액·반환제도 개선 95

제4절 후원금 제도의 개선 98

1. 정당의 후원회 지정허용 99

2. 법인·단체의 선관위를 통한 정치자금 기탁허용 101

3. 선거출마자의 후원금 모금시기 개선 102

제5절 재·보궐선거비용의 원인제공자 부담 103

1. 선거경비 전액 부담 104

2. 기탁금·보전선거비용 반환 105

제5장 맺음말 109

제1절 연구결과 요약 109

제2절 연구에 대한 정책적 함의 111

참고문헌 112

부록 115

[부록 1] 최근 5년간 경상보조금 지급내역 115

[부록 2] 최근 5년간 선거보조금 지급내역 116

[부록 3] 최근 5년간 정당별 기탁금 지급현황 117

[부록 4] 선거공영비용 유형별 내용 118

[부록 5] 제17대 대통령선거 선거비용 보전현황 119

[부록 6] 제18대 국회의원선거 선거비용 보전현황 120

[부록 7] 제5회 전국동시지방선거 선거비용 보전현황 122

[부록 8] 민선4기(‘06-’09) 기간중 재·보궐선거 사유별 선거경비 집행액 123

[부록 9] 예비후보자의 선거운동 소요 예상비용 124

[부록 10] 제5회 전국동시지방선거 보전비용 과다지출 기초단체 현황 125

[부록 11] 제18대 국회의원선거 정당별 득표현황 126

[부록 12] 제5회 전국동시지방선거 정치자금 회계보고 현황 127

ABSTRACT 128

〈표 1〉 우리나라 선거비용 보전제도 개정 연혁 13

〈표 2〉 선거공영제의 장·단점 15

〈표 3〉 경상보조금 배분비율 22

〈표 4〉 여성추천보조금 배분비율 24

〈표 5〉 장애인추천보조금 배분비율 24

〈표 6〉 보조금의 감액사유 및 범위 26

〈표 7〉 주요국가의 선거공영제도 현황 41

〈표 8〉 선거별·선거운동기구별 유급선거사무원 수 43

〈표 9〉 선거별 텔레비전 및 라디오 방송연설 허용 현황 55

〈표 10〉 선거별 자동차와 확성장치 등 사용 수 58

〈표 11〉 최근 선거연도 정당보조금 및 후보자 보전비용 지급현황 66

〈표 12〉 제5회 동시지방선거 반환·보전 받은 보전비용 중 정당 등 인계 금액 67

〈표 13〉 제5회 동시지방선거 선거비용 보전금액 68

〈표 14〉 2010년도 지방자치단체 재정자립도 현황 69

〈표 15〉 최근 국회의원선거의 공영화 수준 70

〈표 16〉 예비후보자의 선거운동에 소요되는 예상 비용(제18대 국선기준) 71

〈표 17〉 2010.6.2.실시 경상남도지사선거 선거비용 보전청구 내역 74

〈표 18〉 제18대 국회의원선거 득표대비 국고보조금 배분율 89

〈표 19〉 국고보조금 지급 추이 92

〈표 20〉 최근 5년간 정당별 경상보조금 감액 현황 96

〈표 21〉 정당후원회 폐지 이전의 정당후원금 수입현황 99

〈표 22〉 과거 법인·단체의 후원금 기부현황 101

〈표 23〉 민선4기(2006-2009년)기간중 선거별 재·보궐선거 사유 104

〈표 24〉 2006-2009년까지 재·보궐선거 기준 예상 환수액 107

〈그림 1〉 정치자금제도 흐름도 16

〈그림 2〉 경상보조금 배분체계도 23

〈그림 3〉 후원회등록 체계도 31

〈그림 4〉 기탁금수탁·지급 개요도 37

Public management of elections refers to "an election system under which governmental authorities can manage election and assume required election expenses to prevent evil practices caused by non-interference of governmental authorities in election campaign activities, ultimately contributing to improving the equity of election, reducing election expenses and thereby implementing fair election." As far as public management of elections is concerned, the Constitution of South Korea provides that "both political parties and candidates shall be exempt from any liability for expenses related to election, unless otherwise specified in applicable laws and regulations." This way, it declares the principle of governmental liabilities for election expenses.

In this context, at the 3rd amendment of Political Financing Act in 1980, South Korea introduced state subsidy system from advanced countries into the world of Korean political parties, because it was accepted that state aid would be required for political party activities on the basis of political party's public functions for the development of democracy. At present, the coverage of benefits from state subsidy becomes gradually extended into further applications in such a way that amount equivalent to usual state subsidy shall be added to governmental budget for every public official election just prior to termination of office, and candidacy nomination subsidy system for both woman politicians and handicapped ones shall be newly established in addition to current system of state subsidy.

Moreover, in order to keep pace with the constitutional purport of public management of elections, South Korea adopts public management system in some part of election activities such as pasting campaign (candidate) posters and forwarding campaign bulletins with a view to assuring the minimum required public management of election for candidates and the fairness of election campaign. In terms of public funding system, it is reasonably to say that South Korea implements a complete public management of elections in institutional aspects, because it adopts a flexible funding system based on authorities with liability for election expenses, where state or local government shall take any direct liabilities for expenses of election campaign, or election expenses paid by political parties and candidates shall be replenished to the extent that those expenses are subject to requirements for replenishment of election expenses after election day.

However, the realities of public management of elections are not yet satisfactory in South Korean politics, partially because even legitimate expenses paid in capacity of preliminary candidate and other reasonable expenses spent in establishing and maintaining campaign office - though those expenses are legally recognized as election expenses - are not accepted as preservable expenses in reality, and partially because election expenses - even subjectt o total sum ceiling - are still calculated and replenished as preservable expenses through itemized factual verification, which causes considerable deferred amount of preservable expenses.

In South Korea, there are 4 ways of political financing available, such as 1) state subsidy granted from state authorities to political parties, 2) party expenditure paid by party members of a political party, 3) contribution raised through political supporters' association, and 4) trust money consigned via Republic of Korea National Election Commission (NEC) by any person who wants to donate political fund to a political party. Here, party expenditure is still very insufficient in terms of payment results due to relatively small number of genuine party members in each political party. Besides, in terms of political trust money, the Designated Trust Money (DTS) system was abolished in 1997 and the political contribution of corporations and associations was also prohibited in 2004. As a result, the amount of trust money for political purposes has been remarkably reduced up to now, so political parties in South Korea rely virtually on state subsidy and political contributions alone for political financing.

Financial support of state subsidy for political parties plays a fundamental role in public management of elections of South Korea. This subsidy of state authorities has positive effectiveness in preventing any improper leverage exerted by any political contributor or pressure groups over a political party, and implementing its original public functions required for development of democracy. However, it also has adverse effects in the one sense that it may work in favor of established political parties or political power, and may cause perpetuating an old frame of assembly, and in the other sense that the original independence and autonomy of political parties may be unnecessarily violated by state authorities, and political apparat may be further bureaucratized and expanded in parallel with larger burden of tax on people.

In South Korea, additional state aids are supplied to political parties at every election of public office, as mentioned above. However, such an additional state aid available to political parties simply due to election, apart from usual state subsidy for political party, implies how much South Korean political parties still depend on state authorities.

In order to build up the viability of political parties in South Korea, it is necessary for them to have their own capacity to raise political fund. In other words, now is the time to introduce a new system ofstate subsidy available in form of matching fund from which political parties can benefit in proportion to actual results of party expenditure collection.

In view of the actual operating conditions of public management of elections by election campaign route in South Korea, it is found that competent persons involved in election campaign (e.g. election campaign manager) appeal to support for a candidate in open space; printed matters (e.g. campaign poster, campaign bulletin, etc) are used to advertise candidates for a political party; structural installations (e.g. sign, hanging board, placard, etc) including campaign office are used to publicize candidates for public office; and mass media (e.g.newspaper ads, TV commercials, etc) / open public address and interview /TV debate and interview program / official web page (IT networking) for a candidate are respectively used to appeal to support for a candidate. These ways of election campaign allow NEC to adopt public management system, or replenish election expenses as claimed by political parties or candidates, if they meet requirements for preservable expenses after the day of election.

In South Korea, there are a variety of issues revealed from the recent propagation of public management of elections. One of the issues is redundant financial support of election expenses for political party and candidate. State subsidy is granted to political parties at every election of public office, but election expenses paid by candidates can be additionally replenished if they meet requirements for preservable expenses after election. That is why there are certain cases where both political party and candidates (nominated by political party) may benefit from preservation of election expenses. Next, preservable expenses of election cause a burden of local government budget and undermine even independent local projects that have been promoted over several years. Particularly, the budget of local government becomes much more jeopardized due to unexpected recall or special election.

Thus, in order to resolve existing issues revealed in the operation of public management of elections, it is necessary to convert election subsidy for political parties into the financial pool of public management of elections; eliminate existing redundancy in replenishment of election expenses (so that only candidates can benefit from preservable expenses); and upgrade the polling score ratio per candidate as a current requirement of preservable expenses in election. And it is advisable that state authorities should grant their subsidy on preservable election expenses to local governments with weak base of budget.

Furthermore, it is also necessary to streamline current public management of elections by rationally improving election campaign system in South Korea. Above all, it is important to assure practical means of election campaign at lower expenses to the full extent as possible: Minimize the number of election campaign staffs as a causal factor of money-tainted election; enhance regulatory controls over election campaign driven by a private interested group and the activities of political party just prior to impending election; facilitate election campaign by way of public interview and debate in mass media or on the web; and promote election campaign with the help of volunteers.

And it is also advisable that election campaign activities should rely further on broadcast media (e.g. TV or radio) that is more effective in public relations than other means, and NEC should allow candidates to use their joint advertisement on newspaper, so that qualified voters can select a desired candidate according to rational standards. Moreover, it is recommended that state authorities should replenish election expenses to certain extent of public relations for candidate after the day of election, so that even candidates who lack in financial power may use mass media and press to enjoy assured opportunities to publicize them.

In South Korea, current "Political Financing Act" prohibits candidates of public office from taking any political fund donated by corporations and associations, and from organizing any political supporters' association. Inevitably, political parties must rely on party expenditure to acquire a pool of election budget with self-help efforts, so they tend to depend on state subsidy for their operation. Thus, it is advisable that central or municipal/regional office of political parties should be allowed to rely on political supporters' association as a part of political financing route, so that they cannot be tempted to give and take any kind of political black money (e.g. contributory fund for public nomination). In addition, it is necessary to assure that corporations and associations are allowed to designate certain or unspecified candidates to some extentas possible when consigning any political trust fund through NEC, so that political financing can be more smoothly and legitimately available to political parties in the interest of political development and policy-driven party activities.

Lately, there are more frequent opinions for passing the buck of recall or special election expenses to responsible person(s). Existing causal factors of recall or special election - such as invalidated election, resignation during tenure and loss of electoral eligibility - bring about a vacuum of public administration as well as a burden of election expenses on central and local government.

As a result, an argument for passing the buck of total election expenses to responsible person(s) for recallor special election comes into serious conflict of public opinions with an argument for restoring trust fund and preservable election expenses. In view of the constitutional purport of current prohibitive regulations against passing the buck of election expenses to political party or candidate, it is necessary to take more careful approaches to liability for those expenses, since both arguments may violate public management of elections or the Less Restrictive Alternative (LRA), or may infringe on a right to take / hold a public office.

Despite somewhat subjective viewpoints of author in this paper, even the subjective findings are obtained from personal experiences of author during long years of election management work. Hence, it is expected that the suggestions of this study will mesh with institutional improvements to comply with South Korean politics in reality, ultimately contributing to establishment of a good foundation for public management of elections in South Korea.