완전명정죄 처벌규정의 입법론

Abstract

The principle is that even if an illegal act is committed while intoxicated after drinking, it is not punished as a piece of responsibility unless the law of "free act in cause" is applied. However, we cannot deny that the risks and harms of criminal activity in a drunken state that can and is normally occurring are simply unacceptable realities. However, even if the public's concerns and antipathy toward drunken crimes are great, they cannot be punished without legal or theoretical grounds and ignoring even the principle of responsibility. However, there is no problem in our court's passive attitude toward responsibility without any special grounds for a crime that should be effectively reduced from responsibility when it comes to responsibility principles. As a compromise response to such a dilemma, Article 323a of the German Criminal Law stipulates punishment for the crime of full name. Many agree that Germany's criminal code is the most controversial by conflicting with the principle of responsibility. Nevertheless, the existence of this regulation is an unavoidable reality in criminal policy, as punishment cannot be waived for those who commit illegal acts under the name of the law. Despite conflicts with the principle of responsibility, it is believed that Korea should take effective legal action against crimes committed in name. In that case, as in other countries such as Germany, which has full-name punishment regulations, the task is to find a justification for the punishment code from the perspective of responsibility principle. In this regard, it is reasonable to respect the principle of responsibility, but to ask for understanding and interpret the punishment regulation for full justification as an exceptional liability recognition regulation. In short, if the core of responsibility is based on the possibility of criticism that illegal evasion was possible through the perception of risk, it is not allowed to claim responsibility for the lack of awareness of specific violations of legal interests if a criminal who was able to predict post-nominal acts committed arbitrary illegality under the name of a Such a result is typically based on a dangerous way of action, because the parties have a social responsibility to avoid it. In this case, it is desirable not to ban alcohol-related acts themselves, but to resolve them with the logic that it is not only the duty of the legislator to crack down on the risks and protect the interests of the law by intervening only in the actions that have realized the individual risks that the criminal predicted, but also that such regulations do not conflict fully with the principle of responsibility. Based on the results of these accidents, we propose to establish a new clause. Article 000 of the Criminal Act [Full name] If a person who intentionally or mistakenly goes into a state of anonymity through alcoholic beverages or other substances commits a crime in this state but cannot be punished because he or she was not able to take responsibility due to the name, he or she shall be sentenced to not more than three years in prison or fined. 2 The sentence referred to in the preceding paragraph shall not exceed the sentence prescribed for a crime committed in the name of a crime. ➂ Where there is a special provision in relation to the requirements for filing a complaint against a crime committed under the circumstances, the crime referred to in paragraph (1) shall also be in accordance with the example of such crime.