본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

‘흉기휴대 공갈’친족상도례 적용의 타당성 대상판결 : 대법원 2010. 7. 29. 선고 2010도5795 판결

Validity of Applying Special Exception to Relatives with respect to ‘Extortion Armed with a Deadly Weapon’

0

조회

0

다운로드

6

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

Special exception to relatives applies to property crimes except robbery and destruction. Extortion armed with a deadly weapon unlike robbery shall have reasonable evidence why it shall apply to special exception to relatives. When the evidence is compared with robbery, first of all, it is not reasonable that the legal interest of extortion is on the side of possibility, generating from the resultof infringing life or body by violence or intimidation as the legal interest of robbery is to protect the life or body. Second, violence and intimidation of robbery are enough to have reached ‘suppression against the opposite party’s disobedience’. However, a robber tries to do violence or intimidation, but it is not rationale that the attempted robbery which is not enough to have reached suppression against the opposite party’s disobedience and the conspiracy or preparation for the robberywhich has not reached commencement stage is excluded as special exception to relatives. Third, robbery implies that one shall acquire any property or benefits to property against opposite party’s will, but it is not valid that embezzlement, breach of trust,and robbery apply to special exception to relatives, even though they acquire any property or benefits to property against opposite party’s will. Law on Punishment of Violent Acts excludes application of Banuisabulbeoljoe It means that the perpetrator shall not be punished if the victim does not want his punishment. in case of violence or intimidation with respect to ‘Armed with a deadly weapon to Relatives’. However, extortion armed with a deadly weapon to relatives applies to special exception. In other words, violence or intimidation to relatives is punished, but it is against people’s law sentiment that acquisition of any property or benefits to property by violence or intimidation is not punished. The reason of existence of special exception to relatives is to aim not for family members’ ownership or protection of property but for protection of family’s peace. Admitting it in case of possibility which gives relatives damages against their life or body would break a balance of social law and order totally and give up using the authority of the state’s punishment. If so, the criterion with respect to whether or not special exception to relatives applies shall exclude crimes which make it possible to injure relatives’life or body. Therefore, extortion and attempted extortion except robbery shall be excluded from application of special exception to relatives and it is reasonable that they are regulated by Law on Punishment of Violent Acts

Abstract

Special exception to relatives applies to property crimes except robbery and destruction. Extortion armed with a deadly weapon unlike robbery shall have reasonable evidence why it shall apply to special exception to relatives. When the evidence is compared with robbery, first of all, it is not reasonable that the legal interest of extortion is on the side of possibility, generating from the resultof infringing life or body by violence or intimidation as the legal interest of robbery is to protect the life or body. Second, violence and intimidation of robbery are enough to have reached ‘suppression against the opposite party’s disobedience’. However, a robber tries to do violence or intimidation, but it is not rationale that the attempted robbery which is not enough to have reached suppression against the opposite party’s disobedience and the conspiracy or preparation for the robberywhich has not reached commencement stage is excluded as special exception to relatives. Third, robbery implies that one shall acquire any property or benefits to property against opposite party’s will, but it is not valid that embezzlement, breach of trust,and robbery apply to special exception to relatives, even though they acquire any property or benefits to property against opposite party’s will. Law on Punishment of Violent Acts excludes application of Banuisabulbeoljoe It means that the perpetrator shall not be punished if the victim does not want his punishment. in case of violence or intimidation with respect to ‘Armed with a deadly weapon to Relatives’. However, extortion armed with a deadly weapon to relatives applies to special exception. In other words, violence or intimidation to relatives is punished, but it is against people’s law sentiment that acquisition of any property or benefits to property by violence or intimidation is not punished. The reason of existence of special exception to relatives is to aim not for family members’ ownership or protection of property but for protection of family’s peace. Admitting it in case of possibility which gives relatives damages against their life or body would break a balance of social law and order totally and give up using the authority of the state’s punishment. If so, the criterion with respect to whether or not special exception to relatives applies shall exclude crimes which make it possible to injure relatives’life or body. Therefore, extortion and attempted extortion except robbery shall be excluded from application of special exception to relatives and it is reasonable that they are regulated by Law on Punishment of Violent Acts

참고문헌 (38)

  1. 권오걸, (2009), 헝설출판사
  2. 김성돈, "형법각론(제2판)" (2009), 성균관대학교 출판부
  3. 김성돈, "형법총론(제2판)" (2009), 성균관대학교 출판부
  4. 김성천, "형법각론" (2006), 동현출판사
  5. 김성천, "형법총론(제4판)" (2008), 삼양애드
  6. 김일수, "한국형법III(각론상)" (1994), 박영사
  7. 김일수, "새로쓴 형법각론(제7판)" (2007), 박영사
  8. 박상기, "형법각론(제8판)" (2011), 박영사
  9. 박상기, "형법총론(제8판)" (2009), 박영사
  10. 배종대, "형법각론(제7전정판)" (2010), 홍문사
  11. 배종대, "형법총론(제9개정판)" (2009), 홍문사
  12. 신동운, "형법 제`개정 자료집" (2009), 한국형사정책연구원
  13. 신동운, "형법제정자료집" (1990), 한국형사정책연구원
  14. 형사특별법 정비방안(5) 폭력행위등처벌에관한법률, "신양균", 한국형사정책연구원, ~ (2008)
  15. 이영란, "형법학(각론강의)" (2008), 형설출판사
  16. 이재상, "형법각론(제7판)" (2010), 박영사
  17. 이재상, "형법총론(제7판)" (2011), 박영사
  18. 이정원, "형법각론" (1999), 법지사
  19. 형법각칙 개정연구〔1〕, In 형법각칙의 개정방향과 기본문제, "이천현", 한국형사정책연구원, ~ (2007)
  20. 이형국, "형법각론" (2007), 법문사
  21. 이형국, "형법총론(제4판)" (2007), 법문사
  22. 임웅, "형법총론(제3정판 보정)" (2011), 법문사
  23. 임웅, "형법각론(제3전정판 보정)" (2011), 법문사
  24. 오영근, "형법각론" (2009), 박영사
  25. 정성근, "형법각론(제4판)" (2011), 삼영사
  26. 정성근, "형법총론(제5판)" (2011), 삼지원
  27. 정영일, "형법총론(제3판)" (2010), 박영사
  28. 진계호, "형법총론(제8판)" (2007), 대왕사
  29. 최관식, "형법각론" (2009), 三宇社
  30. 김정환, "공갈죄와 상해죄, 그리고 죄수", 고시계, 53(10) (2008), 고시계사
  31. 김정환, "공갈죄의 본질과 공갈의 해석", 형사법연구, 20(2), pp.111~128 (2008), 한국형사법학회
  32. 박기석, "폭력행위등처벌에관한법률의 개정론과 폐지론 - 형사특별법의 전반적 정비 관점에서", 형사정책연구, 17(1), pp.117~150 (2006), 한국형사정책연구원
  33. 이기헌, "폭력행위등처벌에관한법률의 정비방안", 형사정책, 17(2), pp.55~79 (2005), 한국형사정책학회
  34. 이천현, "재산범죄 분야의 개정에 관한 소고", 법학논총, 27(1), pp.85~110 (2010), 법학연구소
  35. 이천현, "친족관계에 따른 형법상의 효과 문제점과 개선방안을 중심으로", 형사정책연구 (2001), 한국형사정책연구원
  36. 정성근, "친족상도례", 고시연구, 21(5) (1994), 고시연구사
  37. 정영석, "공갈죄", 고시계, 28(2) (1983), 고시계사
  38. 황태정, "형법상 친족간 특례규정과 피해자의 의사", 피해자학연구, 16(1), pp.105~122 (2008), 한국피해자학회

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (6건)