수강명령제도의 형사제재로서의 역할에 대한 소고
The Status and Improvements on Attendance Center Order system
1
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
With the suggestion of institutional treatment's problems, community treatment was appeared under the basis that it's effective for prevention of labeling effect and rehabilitation of criminals. In comparison with institutional treatment, community treatment has a strength that it's economical, humanitarian and effective as a criminal sanction. Therefore, there are continuously efforts to replace institutional treatment with community treatment. Especially, if considering the principle of criminal law's supplement, punishment will be used as the final measure. Furthermore, if there is any measure guaranteeing effectiveness, punishment must hide behind it. So, recent treatment is focusing on community treatment moved from institutional treatment. For the community treatment conducted for adult criminals because of the revision of criminal law in 1995, there are probation, social service and attendance center order system. The uses of the community treatment are continuously increased by imposing as a type of parallelism during the suspended sentence or probation and replacing institutional treatment. Especially, youth criminals recently can sentence as an independent system, so the area of application is expected to be widened as adult criminals if the positive evaluation of execution is expanded. Like that, there are efforts of studying and policy which intend to increase their application as the community treatment at present. Recently, revision of special obeying article (Article 32 of law related to probation) for probation order, social service ordering replacement of penalty defaulting person, etc. are the results. In here, this study intends to examine the current situation of attendance center order execution and future's tasks, etc. for the vitalization of attendance center order.
Abstract
With the suggestion of institutional treatment's problems, community treatment was appeared under the basis that it's effective for prevention of labeling effect and rehabilitation of criminals. In comparison with institutional treatment, community treatment has a strength that it's economical, humanitarian and effective as a criminal sanction. Therefore, there are continuously efforts to replace institutional treatment with community treatment. Especially, if considering the principle of criminal law's supplement, punishment will be used as the final measure. Furthermore, if there is any measure guaranteeing effectiveness, punishment must hide behind it. So, recent treatment is focusing on community treatment moved from institutional treatment. For the community treatment conducted for adult criminals because of the revision of criminal law in 1995, there are probation, social service and attendance center order system. The uses of the community treatment are continuously increased by imposing as a type of parallelism during the suspended sentence or probation and replacing institutional treatment. Especially, youth criminals recently can sentence as an independent system, so the area of application is expected to be widened as adult criminals if the positive evaluation of execution is expanded. Like that, there are efforts of studying and policy which intend to increase their application as the community treatment at present. Recently, revision of special obeying article (Article 32 of law related to probation) for probation order, social service ordering replacement of penalty defaulting person, etc. are the results. In here, this study intends to examine the current situation of attendance center order execution and future's tasks, etc. for the vitalization of attendance center order.
참고문헌 (41)
- Franz Streng, "Strafrechtliche Sanktion - Die Strafzumessung und ihre Grundlagen", pp.1~ (2002), Stuttgart Berlin Köln
- 守山 正, "ビギナーズ刑事政策", pp.226~ (2008), 成文堂
- 송광섭, "형사정책", pp.577~ (1998), 유스티아누스
- 법무부, "2006년 사회봉사명령·수강명령 집행분석집", pp.6~ (2007), 법무부
- 수강명령프로그램의 운영실태와 개발방향, "손동권", 형사정책연구원, ~ (1998)
- 신진규, "보호관찰제도 도입의 기본방향", 청소년범죄연구, 6, pp.12~ (1998), 법무부
- 조대환, "현행 보호관찰제도의 문제점", 보호, 통권 : 5 (1997)
- 차용석, "보호관찰제도의 효율적 시행방안", 청소년범죄연구, 7, pp.10~ (1989), 법무부
- 이승호, "우리 나라 사회내처우의 향후 발전방향", 형사정책, (8), pp.112~ (1996)
- 이재상, "사회보호법론", pp.176~177 (1981), 경문사
- 배종대, "형사정책", pp.341~ (1999), 홍문사
- 박영수, "한국 소년보호관찰제도의 운영실태 및 운영상의 문제점", 청소년범죄연구, 9, pp.240~241 (1991), 법무부
- 박미숙, "형사제재로서의 사회봉사명령의 의의와 전망", 형사법연구, (17), pp.91~112 (2002), 한국형사법학회
- 황일호, "재판 실무상의 사회봉사명령의 문제점과 개선방안", 矯正硏究, 40, pp.83~104 (2008), 한국교정학회
- 이태언, "보호관찰법론", pp.14~ (1990), 형설출판사
- 김일수, "원상회복의 형사제재로서의 의미와 기능", 피해자학연구, (2), pp.20~ (1993)
- 김재희, "독립된 제재수단으로 사회봉사명령 활용의 제고방안", 홍익법학, 12(1), pp.429~451 (2011), 법학연구소
- 박성수, "음주교통사범 수강명령 효과에 관한 연구", 한국공안행정학회보, 16(3), pp.139~168 (2007), 한국공안행정학회
- 법무연수원, "2012범죄백서" (2013)
- 법무연수원, "2011범죄백서" (2012)
- 법무연수원, "2010범죄백서" (2011)
- 법무연수원, "2009범죄백서" (2010)
- 법무연수원, "2008범죄백서" (2009)
- 법무부, "2011법무연감", 법무부, ~ (2011)
- 보호관찰, 사회봉사 및 수강명령의 실태 및 개선방안-성인범을 중심으로, "장성원", 한국형사정책연구원, 28~29 (1998)
- 검찰청, "2010마약류범죄백서", pp.207~ (2011), 검찰청
- 법무부, "2011범죄예방정책 통계연보", 법무부 범죄예방정책국, 70~ (2012)
- 김용세, "피해자학", pp.238~ (2012), 형설출판사
- 박상식, "범죄피해자와 회복적 사법", pp.229~ (2008), 한국학술정보
- 이성칠, "한국 보호관찰에서의 회복적 사법의 적용실태와 전망", 법학논집, 14(2), pp.111~137 (2009), 법학연구소
- 손외철, "사회봉사·수강명령에서의 회복적 사법 적용방안", 법학논집, 16(1), pp.87~109 (2011), 법학연구소
- 이진국, "형사제재체계 내에서의 사회내처우제도", 형사법연구, (겨울 특집), pp.527~ (2004)
- 吉田勢子, "刑の猶予制度についてー宣告猶予と執行猶予", 法学新報, 111(７・８), pp.290~ (2005)
- 김성돈, "형법총론", pp.789~ (2008), 성균관대학교 출판부
- 한영수, "선고유예제도의 정비방안", 형사정책연구, 17(4), pp.537~576 (2006), 한국형사정책연구원
- 이재상, "형법총론", pp.611~ (2012)
- 조준현, "보호관찰제도의 운영과 과제", 矯正硏究, 35, pp.7~46 (2007), 한국교정학회
- 김현희, "가정폭력수강명령대상자의보호처분경험에 관한 근거이론적 접근", 한국가족복지학, (20), pp.71~106 (2007), 한국가족사회복지학회
- 법무부, "2010년 법무연감", 188~ (2010)
- 2011범죄예방정책통계, "법무부", 법무부 범죄예방정책국, 70~ (2012)
- Heike Jung, "Strafrechtiche Sanktionsystem, In Verhandlungen des 10. österreichischen Juristentages, Abt. Strafrecht", pp.7~ (1988), Wein