Looking at Virtual Assets from a Criminal Perspective: The Korean Supreme Court Decision 2020Do9789, Dec. 16, 2021
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Criminalization of breach of trust is unique to Korea and has served as an ultima ratio for the protection of property rights. Unfortunately, the Korean Supreme Court’s rulings on breach of trust have been the subject of scholarly debate for various reasons, including them being against nullum crimen sine lege. In that regard, the recent Supreme Court decision on whether “not returning the mistakenly transferred virtual assets” constitutes breach of trust presents an opportunity to review the features of breach of trust in conjunction with virtual assets (VAs). The acquittal may reflect the recent shift of the Supreme Court towards narrowing the scope of breach of trust. Though not wholly consistent with the precedents, it does reflect the trend to strengthen the principle of nullum crimen sine lege. However, in light of the rising popularity of VAs in Korean society and continuous adoption of regulations on VAs at domestic and international levels, including the travel rule, there may be a room for reconsideration in future.
Abstract
Criminalization of breach of trust is unique to Korea and has served as an ultima ratio for the protection of property rights. Unfortunately, the Korean Supreme Court’s rulings on breach of trust have been the subject of scholarly debate for various reasons, including them being against nullum crimen sine lege. In that regard, the recent Supreme Court decision on whether “not returning the mistakenly transferred virtual assets” constitutes breach of trust presents an opportunity to review the features of breach of trust in conjunction with virtual assets (VAs). The acquittal may reflect the recent shift of the Supreme Court towards narrowing the scope of breach of trust. Though not wholly consistent with the precedents, it does reflect the trend to strengthen the principle of nullum crimen sine lege. However, in light of the rising popularity of VAs in Korean society and continuous adoption of regulations on VAs at domestic and international levels, including the travel rule, there may be a room for reconsideration in future.
참고문헌 (59)
- "Securities and Exchange Commission v. Terraform Labs PTE, Ltd. and Do Kwon, No. 21-mc-810, (S.D.N.Y. 2021)", ~ (2021)
- (2022)[URL]
- Wolfgang K. Härdle, "Understanding Cryptocurrencies", J. Fin. Econometrics, 18, pp.181~ (2020)
- David Yermack, "Handbook of Digital Currency", pp.31~43 (2015)
- "Warren Buffett gives his most expansive explanation for why he doesn’t believe in bitcoin" (2022)[URL]
- (2022)[URL]
- 김이수, "비트코인(Bitcoin)의 사법상 지위에 관한 고찰", 법학연구, 59(4), pp.75~101 (2018), 법학연구소[DOI]
- "Why Is Cryptocurrency Trading Popular in South Korea, Investopia" (2021)[URL]
- (2021)[URL]
- , Dec. 16, 2021, 2020Do9789, , 2021
- , Feb. 14, 2020, 2019Gohap56, , 2020
- , July 2, 2020, 2020No171, , 2020
- , Nov. 11, 2021, 2021Do9855, , 2021
- , Feb. 18, 2021, 2016Do18761, , 2021
- 허일태, "배임죄 해석의 나아갈 방향", 형사법연구, 27(1), pp.3~36 (2015), 한국형사법학회
- , Oct. 29, 2015, 2013Do9481, , 2015
- , May 13, 2003, 2003Do1178, , 2003
- , Dec. 14, 1961, 4294Hyungsang371, , 1961
- , Mar. 8, 1994, 93Do2272, , 1994
- 임웅, "재산범죄에 있어서 ‘재물’과 ‘재산상의 이익’ 개념에 대한 비판적 고찰", 형사법연구, 21(4), pp.359~374 (2009), 한국형사법학회[DOI]
- 안성조, "재산범죄의 객체로서 재물과 재산상 이익", 형사법연구, 32(3), pp.211~246 (2020), 한국형사법학회
- , May 17, 2018, 2017Do4027, , 2018
- 김태명, "재물 및 재산상 이익의 개념과 횡령죄와 배임죄의 관계", 형사법연구, 31(4), pp.295~326 (2019), 한국형사법학회
- 안정빈, "배임죄 처벌과 관련한 형법이론적 논의 — 부동산 이중매도 쟁점을 중심으로 —", 법학논총, 38(4), pp.143~172 (2021), 법학연구소
- , Aug. 21, 2014, 2014Do3363, , 2014
- , June 18, 2020, 2019Do14340, , 2020
- , Aug. 27, 2020, 2019Do14770, , 2020
- 이용식, "대물변제예약 부동산의 이중매매와 배임죄의 형사불법적 구조", 형사판례연구, 23, pp.223~259 (2015), 한국형사판례연구회
- , Dec. 9, 2010, 2010Do891, , 2010
- 송진경, "착오로 송금된 금전을 임의로 소비한 경우와 재산범죄", 형사법연구, 23(1), pp.385~406 (2011), 한국형사법학회[DOI]
- 이근우, "착오송금 받은 돈의 임의소비와 횡령죄 - 대법원 2010. 12. 9. 선고 2010도891 판결 -", 형사법연구, 26(1), pp.265~290 (2014), 한국형사법학회[DOI]
- "Seoul L. Rev", 2020, 395~407
- , June 23, 2022, 2017Do3829, , 2022
- , July 19, 2018, 2017Do17494, , 2018
- 김재윤, "전기통신금융사기 범행에 이용된 계좌에서 계좌명의인의 현금인출과 횡령죄 성립 여부- 대법원 2018. 7. 19. 선고 2017도17494 전원합의체 판결 -", 법조, 68(1), pp.524~548 (2019), 법조협회[DOI]
- , Apr. 11, 2013, 2013Do1079, , 2013
- "Communiqué, G20 Argentina 2018" (2022)[URL]
- "Who we are" (2022)[URL]
- (2022)[URL]
- "The FATF Recommendations" (2022)[URL]
- "Updated Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach to Virtual Assets and Virtual Asset Service Providers" (2021)[URL]
- "Enforcement of Travel Rule on VASPs to Take Effect from March 25" (2022)[URL]
- 송문호, "가상자산 착오이체와 횡령죄⋅배임죄의 성부 - 대법원 2021. 12. 16.선고 2020도9789 판결 -", 동북아법연구, 16(1), pp.243~263 (2022), 동북아법연구소
- Sanford Claire, "Cryptocurrency: The Consequences of a Regulatory Gap in a Rapidly Growing Industry", SLU L. J. Online, 98 (2022)
- "Statement on “Framework for ‘Investment Contract’ Analysis of Digital Assets”" (2019)[URL]
- "U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission v. Kik Interactive Inc., No. 1:19-cv-5244 (S.D.N.Y. 2020)", ~ (2020)
- "Audet v. Fraser, No. 3:16-cv-940, 57 (D. Conn. 2021)", ~ (2021)
- , May 30, 2018, 2018Do3619, , 2018
- (2022)[URL]
- Jong-dae Bae, , pp.9~10 (2009)
- Jaesang Lee, , pp.413~ (2013)
- , July 20, 2017, 2014Do1104, , 2017
- , Jan. 20, 2011, 2008Do10479, , 2011
- "The Survey of Household Finances and Living Conditions (SFLC) in 2021" (2021)[URL]