본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

피학대여성의 행위에 대한 가벌성 검토에 있어 피학대여성증후군의 가치에 관한 연구 - 미국의 논의에 대한 비판적 분석을 중심으로 -

Study on Validity of Battered Women Syndrome in Analyzing Culpability of Battered Women Who Commits A Crime

강우예
한국피해자학회 (Korean Association Of Victimology)|2010.10|피해자학연구 (Korean Journal of Victimology)|제18권 제2호|pp. 401-432

0

조회

0

다운로드

5

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

self-defensebattered womenbattered women syndromeinsanityadmissibilityculpabilityblameworthyduressmitigation

초록

Battered women syndrome as a type of expert testimony has been widely used since early 1980s in American court to support the argument of justification, excuse and mitigation of sentence of battered women's criminal acts. This fact has been introduced through some articles and other legal materials. In recent years, the written expert opinions about battered women syndrome have been introduced in Korean courts for the defendants who have long been abused and at last committed serious crimes. What is now in issue is that Korean courts actively try to hear the evidence of the syndrome but do not know what the syndrome is about and how it should be understood. In America, the syndrome has not been a stable and unquestionable scientific concept and therefore has been subject to lots of criticisms, especially on admissibility issue. In this paper, I focus on the scientific and legal validity of battered women syndrome and the subject that the syndrome can prove. In other words, the consideration of culpability of battered women is closely related to the admissibility issue of the syndrome. The answer to this simple question will not be simple or easy, because fundamentally there is no clear middle ground between socio-psychological phenomenon and legal standards of justification, necessity, duress, mitigation of sentence. In conclusion, the syndrome should be more prudently used in a sophisticated way, because it has not perfectly proved its' scientific validity and thus legal value for evidence. The syndrome that has both socio-relational aspect and inner-psychological aspect should be considered for correct points of legal standards of justification and excuse.

Abstract

Battered women syndrome as a type of expert testimony has been widely used since early 1980s in American court to support the argument of justification, excuse and mitigation of sentence of battered women's criminal acts. This fact has been introduced through some articles and other legal materials. In recent years, the written expert opinions about battered women syndrome have been introduced in Korean courts for the defendants who have long been abused and at last committed serious crimes. What is now in issue is that Korean courts actively try to hear the evidence of the syndrome but do not know what the syndrome is about and how it should be understood. In America, the syndrome has not been a stable and unquestionable scientific concept and therefore has been subject to lots of criticisms, especially on admissibility issue. In this paper, I focus on the scientific and legal validity of battered women syndrome and the subject that the syndrome can prove. In other words, the consideration of culpability of battered women is closely related to the admissibility issue of the syndrome. The answer to this simple question will not be simple or easy, because fundamentally there is no clear middle ground between socio-psychological phenomenon and legal standards of justification, necessity, duress, mitigation of sentence. In conclusion, the syndrome should be more prudently used in a sophisticated way, because it has not perfectly proved its' scientific validity and thus legal value for evidence. The syndrome that has both socio-relational aspect and inner-psychological aspect should be considered for correct points of legal standards of justification and excuse.

참고문헌 (81)

  1. 김일수, "장기적인 위난과 면책적 긴급피난", 판례연구, (7) (1994), 고려대학교 법학연구소
  2. 박상기, "형법총론, 제8판" (2009)
  3. 이용식, "정당방위와 긴급피난의 몇가지 요건", 형사판례연구, (3) (1995), 형사판례연구회
  4. 조국, "형사법의 성편향", ~ (2004)
  5. 한인섭, "가정폭력 피해자에 의한 가해자 살해: 그 정당화와 면책의 논리", 서울대학교 법학, 37(2) (1996)
  6. 황만성, "과학적 증거의 증거능력과 증명력", 형사정책연구, 18(3), pp.779~810 (2007), 한국형사정책연구원
  7. 대구지방법원, "2010. 1. 7. 선고 2009고합173 판결", ~ (2010)
  8. 대구지방법원, "2007. 12. 27. 선고 2007고합115 판결", ~ (2007)
  9. 서울북부지방법원, "2007. 12. 21. 선고 2007고합341 판결", ~ (2007)
  10. 제주지방법원, "2007. 8. 30. 선고 2007고합86 판결", ~ (2007)
  11. 수원지방법원, "2007. 5. 11. 선고 2007고합54 판결", ~ (2007)
  12. 청주지방법원, "2006. 10. 18. 선고 2006고합22 판결", ~ (2006)
  13. 대전지방법원, "2006. 10. 18. 선고 2006고합102 판결", ~ (2006)
  14. 인천지방법원, "2005. 11. 18. 선고 2005고단4342 판결", ~ (2005)
  15. 부산고등법원, "2005. 6. 30. 선고 2005노39 판결", ~ (2005)
  16. 대구지방법원, "2004. 10. 5. 선고 2004고합318 판결", ~ (2004)
  17. 대구고등법원, "2003. 11. 13. 선고 2003노539 판결", ~ (2003)
  18. 대전고등법원, "2001. 8. 31. 선고 2001노266 판결", ~ (2001)
  19. 대법원, "1992.12.22. 선고 92도2540 판결", ~ (1992)
  20. 대법원, "1984. 1. 24. 선고 83도1873 판결", ~ (1984)
  21. 서울고등법원, "1984. 7. 6. 선고 84노1304 판결", ~ (1984)
  22. 대법원, "1966. 3. 5. 선고 66도63 판결", ~ (1966)
  23. Beecher-Monas, Erica, "Evaluating Scientific Evidence" (2007), Cambridge Univ. Press
  24. Berry, Dawn Bradley, "The Domestic Violence Sourcebook. 3d ed" (2000)
  25. Dortsky, Joan L., "True Equality for Battered Women: The Use of Self-Defense in Colorado", Denv. U. L. Rev, 70, pp.117~ (1992)
  26. Dressler, Joshua, "Understanding Criminal Law" (2006)
  27. Dutton, Mary Ann, "Understanding Women's Responses to Domestic Violence: A Redefinition of Battered Women's Syndrome", Hofstra L. Rev, 21, pp.1191~ (1993)
  28. Faigman, David L., "The Battered Woman Syndrome in the Age of Science", Ariz. L. Rev, 39, pp.67~ (1997)
  29. Finkelstein, Claire O., "Self-Defense as a Rational Excuse", U. Pitt. L. Rev, 57, pp.621~ (1996)
  30. Kinports, "Defending Battered Women's Self-defense Claims", Or. L. Rev, 67, pp.393~ (1988)
  31. Maguigan, Holly, "Battered Women and Self-Defense: Myth and Misconceptions in Current Reform Proposals", U. Pa. L. Rev, 140, pp.379~ (1991)
  32. Mahoney, Martha R., "Legal Images of Battered Women: Redefining the Issue of Separation", Mich. L. Rev, 90, pp.1~ (1991)
  33. Mihajlovich, Mira, "Does Plight Make Right: The Battered Woman Syndrome, Expert Testimony and the Law of Self-Defense", Ind. L.J, 62, pp.1253~ (1987)
  34. Mosteller, Robert P., "Syndromes and Politics in Criminal Trials and Evidence Law", Duke L.J, 46, pp.461~ (1996)
  35. Nourse, V.F., "Self-Defense and Subjectivity", U. Chi. L. Rev, 68, pp.1235~ (2001)
  36. Ogle, Robbin S, "Self-Defense and Battered Women Who Kill", ~ (2002)
  37. Parrish, Janet, "Trend Analysis: Expert Testimony on Battering and its Effects in Criminal Cases", Wis. Women's L.J, 11, pp.75~ (1996)
  38. Robinson, Paul H., "Criminal Law Defenses" (1984), West Pub. Co
  39. Scales, Ann C., "The Emergence of Feminist Jurisprudence: An Essay, in New Approaches to Equality and Sameness (Weisberg, ed., 1993)", ~ (1993)
  40. Schneider, Elizabeth, "Battered Women and Feminist Lawmaking", ~ (2000)
  41. Schopp, Robert F, "Battered Woman Syndrome, Expert Testimony, and the Distinction between Justificatioin and Excuse, 1994 U. Ill. L. Rev. 45", ~ (1994)
  42. Schopp, Robert F., "Justification Defenses and Just Convictions" (1998), Cambridge Univ. Press
  43. Schulhofer, Stephen J., "The Feminist Challege in Criminal Law", U.Pa.L.Rev, 143, pp.2151~ (1995)
  44. Schuller, Regina, "Battered Woman Syndrome and Other Effects of Domestic Violence Against Women, in Modern Scientific Evidence: The Law and Science of Expert Testimony (David L. Faigman et al. eds., 1997)", ~ (1997)
  45. Thyfault, Roberta K., "Comment, Self-Defense: Battered Woman Syndrome on Trial", Cal. W. L. Rev, 20, pp.485~ (1984)
  46. Vaughn, Elizabeth, "The Battered Spouse Defense in Kentucky", N. Ky. L. Rev, 10, pp.399~ (1983)
  47. Walker, Lenore E., "A Response to Elizabeth M. Schneider's Describing and Changing: Women's Self-Defense Work and the Problem of Expert Testimony on Battering", Women's Rts. L. Rep, 9, pp.223~ (1986)
  48. Lenore E.A. Walker, "Battered Woman Syndrome and Self-Defense", Notre Dame J.L. Ethics & Pub. Pol'y, 6, pp.321~ (1992)
  49. Lenore E.A. Walker, "The Battered Women Syndrome" (1984), Springer Pub. Co
  50. Lenore E.A. Walker, "The Battered Woman" (1979), Harper & Row
  51. "Bechtel v. State, 840 P.2d 1 (Okla. Ct. Crim App., 1992)", ~ (1992)
  52. "Boykins v. State, 995 P.2d 474 (Nev. 2000)", ~ (2000)
  53. "Commonwealth v. Hall, 696 N.E.2d 151 (Mass. Ct. App., 1998)", ~ (1998)
  54. "Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 U.S. 579 (1993)", ~ (1993)
  55. "Fielder v. State, 756 S.W.2d 309 (Tex. 1988)", ~ (1988)
  56. "Hawthorne v. State 408 So. 2d 801 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)", ~ (1982)
  57. "Ibn-Tamas v. United States 407 A.2d 626 (D.C. 1979)", ~ (1979)
  58. "Neelley v. State 642 So.2d 494, (Ala.Cr.App. 1993)", ~ (1993)
  59. "New Jersey v. B.H., 834 A.2d 1063 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2003)", ~ (2003)
  60. "New Jersey v. Tierney, 813 A.2d 560 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2003)", ~ (2003)
  61. "People v. Aris, 215 Cal. App. 3d 1178 (1990)", ~ (1990)
  62. "People v. Day, 2 Cal. Rptr. 2d 916 (Ct. App. 1992)", ~ (1992)
  63. "People v. Johnson 205 Ad 2d 344, 613 NYS 2d 160 (1994)", ~ (1994)
  64. "People v. Humphrey, 921 P.2d 1 (Cal. 1996)", ~ (1996)
  65. "People v. Powell, 102 Misc. 2d 775, 424 N.Y.S.2d 626 (Tompkins County Ct. 1980)", ~ (1980)
  66. "People v. Romero, 26 Cal.App. 4th 315 (App. Ct. 1992)", ~ (1992)
  67. "People v. Torres, 488 N.Y.S.2d 358 (Sup. 1985)", ~ (1985)
  68. "People v. Wilson, 487 N.W.2d 822 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992)", ~ (1992)
  69. "State v. Dunn, 758 P.2d 718 (Kan. 1988)", ~ (1988)
  70. "State v. Edwards, 420 So. 2d 663 (La. 1982)", ~ (1982)
  71. "State v. Hennum, 441 N.W.2d 793 (Minn. 1989)", ~ (1989)
  72. "State v. Hundley, 693 P.2d 475 (Kan. 1985)", ~ (1985)
  73. "State v. Kelly, 685 P.2d 564 (Wash. 1984)", ~ (1984)
  74. "State v. Martin, 666 S.W.2d 895 (Mo. Ct. App. 1984)", ~ (1984)
  75. "State v. Meyers, 570 A.2d 1260 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1990)", ~ (1990)
  76. "State v. Peterson, 857 A.2d 1132 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2004)", ~ (2004)
  77. "State v. Richardson, 525 N.W.2d 378 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994)", ~ (1994)
  78. "United States v. Bell, 855 F. Supp. 239 (N.D. Ill. 1994)", ~ (1994)
  79. "United States v. Johnson, 956 F.2d 894 (9th Cir. 1992)", ~ (1992)
  80. "United States v. Sixty Acres in Etowah County, 930 F.2d 857 (11th Cir. 1991)", ~ (1991)
  81. "United States v. Willis, 38 F.3d 170 (5th Cir. 1994)", ~ (1994)

관련 논문AI추천

미국의 정당방위 성립요건인 합리성의 해석론 - 합리적인 인간 기준과 합리적인 매 맞는 여성 기준의 의미김호기한국경찰법학회 · 경찰법연구2009 · 제7권 제2호비대면상황에서의 피학대자의 학대자 살해행위와 정당방위의 성립가능성 - 미국의 매 맞는 여성 기준의 도입가능성 및 그에 대한 대안의 검토 -김호기한국경찰법학회 · 경찰법연구2011 · 제9권 제2호학대남편을 살해한 피학대 여성의 판결에 관한 연구김현정, 이수정한국여성심리학회 · 한국심리학회지:여성2007 · 제12권 제1호배우자 살인으로 수감 중인 가정폭력피해 여성의 면책사유와 관련될 심리특성에 관한 연구서진환, 이수정한국여성정책연구원 · 여성연구2005 · 제2권 제69호Comparative Studies on Rape Trauma Syndrome Evidence in Criminal Court and Its Implications이지나법학연구원 · 법학논고2023 · 제81호가정폭력에 기인하여 배우자를 살해한여성 재소자의 심리특성에 관한 연구이수정한국사회및성격심리학회 · 한국심리학회지: 사회및성격2006 · 제20권 제2호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (16건)

범죄 피해자에 대한 지원의 심리학적 측면문성원pp. 5-45성폭력 피해 아동 진술신빙성 평가의 한계와 전망조은경pp. 47-60수사실무에서 아동 피해자 조사의 문제점과 개선 방향황은영pp. 61-81학대피해아동 보호를 위한 시스템의 효율화 방안문영희pp. 83-104피해자참가제도의 바람직한 도입방안박광민pp. 105-128
원문 보기