본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

原因において自由な行為に関する諸問題の検討 - 日本の議論を参考に -

Problems about Actio Libera in Causa in Japan and Discussion Direction of Korea

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

韓国の刑法は、犯罪者を処罰するために犯罪行爲当時、責任能力があることを要する。しかし、原因において自由な行為(以下‘原自行爲’という)は、犯罪行為当時責任能力を欠如しており、その処罰において正当性が要求される。これと関連しては、可罰性の根拠と関連し、様々な見解が提示され、その処罰においても多くの見解が肯定している。韓国の刑法は、第10条第3項にこれに関する規定をさだめており、処罰をすることを明らかにしているのに対し、日本は明文の規定を定めておらず、學說と判例を通じてその処罰を肯定している。 可罰性の根拠に関する議論は、刑法が明文の規定をおき、判例も処罰を肯定している以上、これからの韓国での議論は、その以外のものを検討すべきであろうと思う。実際、原自行爲は、可罰性の根拠以外にも、①實行の着手以後責任能力が低下される場合、②犯罪者が錯誤に陥る場合、③実行の着手時期(実際、これに関してのみ若干の議論がある)、④限定責任能力を利用した場合などの処理問題など様々な分野にかけて問題点が指摘される。しかし、今まで韓国刑法学では、可罰性を根拠づけることだけにすべての力を注ぎ、これに対しては実質的議論が進んでいない状況である。日本の刑法学ではこれに関して以前から検討が進んできているから日本での議論を参考する必要がある。そこで、本稿では、日本で議論されている原自行爲の諸問題を検討し、今後韓国刑法学でのあるべき議論方向について提示してみた。

Abstract

Responsibility is must exist at the time of act. This is called 'principle of simultaneous existence of acts and responsibilities. Responsibility exists at the time of the act, it can be attributed to the actor about that act. In relation to such problem of responsibility ability the most problematic issue is the so-called Actio libera in causa problem. Actio libera in causa means to act as a responsible incompetence by acts such as drinking alcohol and drug use, and conduct criminal acts in that state. The Korean Penal Code stipulates the provisions of the statement on this in Article 10, paragraph 3, and despite the absence of so-called responsibility at the time of criminal activity, such act is subject to punishment and until recently 'the basis of penalty' It is a fact that there was a major discussion with reference to German discussion on the issue. However, Actio libera in causa is not only a debate about the grounds for penalties, but it is often a problem in virtually various parts. That is, there are plenty of room for discussion in many areas, such as (1) when the responsibility ability is reduced after the commencement of action, (2) when the criminal falls into a mistake, (3) the time to criminal activities (4) When using diminished responsibility. Even though there are plenty of room for discussion in many parts, Korean Criminal Law has only made a major discussion on the basis of penalties Actio libera in causa can only be excluded from punishment if it follows the principle of responsibility principle which demands responsibility when criminal act. However, the purpose of punishing the Korean Penal Code, despite this, has been included, during which it is judged that there was much debate only on the basis of penalty. At the moment, Korea's law court and theory are no longer affirmative about original acts, and there is also a view that asserts that the provision of the Korean penal code itself is the basis for penalties. Therefore, the midpoint of the future discussion related to Actio libera in causa should go to solve the related problem. Among the problems associated with Actio libera in causa, Korean Criminal Law study is a matter of being debated only on the timing of the start of execution, and discussion on other issues is still to be done. Therefore, in this paper, I will examine the issues which are related to Actio libera in causa and discussed recently in Japan and examine how it can be used analyzed in Korean Criminal Law.

참고문헌 (56)

  1. 김일수, "한국형법2" (1996), 박영사
  2. 이재상, "형법총론(제8판)" (2015), 박영사
  3. 김준혁, "원인에 있어서 자유로운 행위와 형법 제10조 제3항", 한양법학, 26(4), pp.189~209 (2015), 한양법학회
  4. 류전철, "과실의 원인에 있어서 자유로운 행위와 과실범의 구별", 법학논총, 35(2), pp.65~87 (2015), 법학연구소
  5. 박정근, "원인에 있어서 자유로운 행위" (1967), 고시계
  6. 이형국, "원인에 있어서 자유로운 행위" (1980), 고시계
  7. 전지연, "원인에서 자유로운 행위", 한림법학FORUM, 3 (1993), 한림대 법학연구소
  8. 최우찬, "자유로운 원인에 의한 행위", 형사법연구, 9 (1996), 한국형사법학회
  9. 한정환, "형법 제10조 제3항과 원인에 있어서 자유로운 행위", 형사법연구, (25), pp.139~162 (2006), 한국형사법학회
  10. 홍태석, "형법 제10조 제3항의 가벌성에 관한 재조명", 원광법학, 26(1), pp.493~511 (2010), 법학연구소
  11. 홍태석, "일본 형법상 자초책임무능력자의 법적책임과우리 논의에의 시사점", 법학연구, 14(2), pp.113~143 (2011), 법학연구소
  12. 川端博, "刑法総論講義" (2013), 成文堂
  13. 橋本正博, "刑法総論" (2015), 新世社
  14. 立石二六, "刑法総論" (2015), 成文堂
  15. 佐久間修, "刑法基本講義" (2013), 有斐閣
  16. 西田典之, "刑法総論" (2006), 弘文堂
  17. 山口厚, "刑法総論" (2007), 有斐閣
  18. 前田雅英, "刑法総論講義" (2015), 東京大学出版会
  19. 浅田和茂, "刑法総論" (2005), 成文堂
  20. 高橋則夫, "刑法総論" (2013), 成文堂
  21. 山口厚, "理論刑法学の最前線" (2001), 岩波書店
  22. 松原芳博, "刑法総論" (2013), 日本評論社
  23. 植松正, "刑法概論I(総論)" (1974), 勁草書房
  24. 大塚仁, "刑法概説(総論)" (2005), 有斐閣
  25. 鈴木茂嗣, "刑法総論" (2001), 成文堂
  26. 佐藤司, "刑法総論講義〔第2版〕" (2000), 信山社
  27. 西原春夫, "犯罪実行行為論" (1998), 成文堂
  28. 山中敬一, "刑法総論" (1997), 青林書院
  29. 中野次雄, "刑法総論概要" (1992), 成文堂
  30. 藤木英雄, "刑法講義総論" (1975), 弘文堂
  31. 堀内捷三, "刑法総論" (2004), 有斐閣
  32. 大谷實, "刑法総論の重要問題" (1994), 立花書房
  33. 内藤謙, "刑法講義" (1991), 有斐閣
  34. 平野龍一, "刑法総論II" (1975), 有斐閣
  35. 井田良, "刑法総論の理論構造" (2005), 成文堂
  36. 鈴木茂嗣, "刑法総論" (2001), 成文堂
  37. 植松正, "刑法概論I" (1974), 勁草書房
  38. 大塚仁, "刑法概説" (2005), 有斐閣
  39. 立石二六, "刑法総論30講" (2007), 成文堂
  40. 西原春夫, "刑法総論" (1977), 成文堂
  41. 藤木英雄, "刑法講義総論" (1975), 弘文堂
  42. 松村格, "日本刑法総論教科書" (2005), 八千代出版株式会社
  43. 斉藤信宰, "新版刑法講義(総論)" (2007), 成文堂
  44. 中森喜彦, "実行開始後の責任能力の低下", 中山研一先生古稀祝賀論文集, 3 (1997)
  45. 曽根威彦, "実行行為の途中で心神耗弱状態になった場合と刑法39条2項適用の可否", 判例時報, (1430) (1993)
  46. 林美月子, "実行行為途中からの責任無能力", 神奈川法学, 28(1) (1993)
  47. 西原春夫, "佐伯千仭博士還暦祝賀(上)" (1968)
  48. 丸山治, "限定責任能力と原因において自由な行為", 別冊ジュリスト, (142) (1997)
  49. 林幹人, "限定責任能力と原因において自由な行為", 別冊ジュリスト刑法判例百選I, (166) (2003)
  50. 山口厚, "原因において自由な行為―遡及禁止論の立場から―", 現代刑事法, (20) (2000)
  51. "東京高判昭和54年5月15日判決", ~
  52. "最判昭53. 7. 28 刑集32巻5号1068頁", ~
  53. "大阪地判昭和51. 3. 4 判時 第822号 109頁", ~
  54. "長崎地判平成4年1月14日判決", ~
  55. Schönke, "Strafgesetzbuch Kommentar" (1997)
  56. Rönnau, "Dogmatisch-konstruktive Lösungsmodelle zur actio liber in causa" (1997), JA

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (35건)