Abstract
The writer points out three difficulties particular in studying of constitutional cases; first, in fact finding, because it should not be confined to relevant alleged wrongful conducts but be extended to its social and historical background within the constitutional process; next, in the necessity for analysis into judge's ideological prejudice, which represents their own views of social and political life in our community and which plays key role in counter-balancing the intervention into human rights on prevailing political power; finally, in establishing solid principle of stare decisis declared by the Supreme Court due to the relatively small number of its precedents with their conceptual ambiguity.
As to the purpose of studying constitutional cases, scholars are required to make minute analysis into the judicial decision-making relating to the constitution in the whole context of constitutional process. The theory based upon such an analysis is expected to be useful for the scholars who are forced to take a definite attitude either for or against the decision, as their practical means to influence the future decisions in realizing their constitutional goals and ideas.
