본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

범죄피해자와 형사절차참여에 관한 고찰

Victims and Criminal Jusitice System

0

조회

0

다운로드

7

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

Why should victims ask that the machinery of criminal justice be set into motion on their behalf? Whar do they want? Victims can pursue one, or even some combinations of three distinct goals. They first ist to see to it that criminal is punished. The second possible objective is to use the justice process as leverage to compel the offrender to undergo treatment. The third possible aim is to try to get court to order the wrongdoer to make restitution. This study examined the realtion with justification of punishment versus criminal victims. It is punishment that comes to most people’s minds first. Most of the deliberations of criminal justice officials concern questions of punishment. Punishment is usually justified on utilitarian grounds as a necessary evil. It is argued nthat punishing wrongdoers curbs furure criminality in a number of ways. The offender who experiences unpleasant consequences learns a lesson and is discouraged from breaking the law again (specific deterrence). Making an example of a convicted criminal also serves as a warning to would-be offenders contemplating the same act (general deterrence). According to theory of punishment as retribution, it is fair and just to make offenders suffer in proportion to the suffering they inflicted on others. Some victims do not look to the criminal justice system to exact revenge in their name. Instead, they want professionals and experts to help offenders become decent, law-abiding citizens. Some victims seek restitution rather than retribution or rehabilitation. Wherther they desire that something be done to the offender (punishment), for the offender (treatment), or for themselves (restitution), victims want the criminal justice system to react effectively to violations of law.

Abstract

Why should victims ask that the machinery of criminal justice be set into motion on their behalf? Whar do they want? Victims can pursue one, or even some combinations of three distinct goals. They first ist to see to it that criminal is punished. The second possible objective is to use the justice process as leverage to compel the offrender to undergo treatment. The third possible aim is to try to get court to order the wrongdoer to make restitution. This study examined the realtion with justification of punishment versus criminal victims. It is punishment that comes to most people’s minds first. Most of the deliberations of criminal justice officials concern questions of punishment. Punishment is usually justified on utilitarian grounds as a necessary evil. It is argued nthat punishing wrongdoers curbs furure criminality in a number of ways. The offender who experiences unpleasant consequences learns a lesson and is discouraged from breaking the law again (specific deterrence). Making an example of a convicted criminal also serves as a warning to would-be offenders contemplating the same act (general deterrence). According to theory of punishment as retribution, it is fair and just to make offenders suffer in proportion to the suffering they inflicted on others. Some victims do not look to the criminal justice system to exact revenge in their name. Instead, they want professionals and experts to help offenders become decent, law-abiding citizens. Some victims seek restitution rather than retribution or rehabilitation. Wherther they desire that something be done to the offender (punishment), for the offender (treatment), or for themselves (restitution), victims want the criminal justice system to react effectively to violations of law.

참고문헌 (29)

  1. 강경래, "수복적 사법이란", 피해자학연구, 13(2), pp.65~75 (2005), 한국피해자학회
  2. 김완진, "공리주의·개혁주의·자유주의" (1996), 서울대학교출판부
  3. 김용세, "피해자학의 발전과 피해자보호의 최신 동향", 피해자학연구, 10(1), pp.137~172 (2002), 한국피해자학회
  4. 도중진, "형사절차에서 범죄피해자에 대한 재고찰", 피해자학연구, 10(1), pp.173~209 (2002), 한국피해자학회
  5. 류전철, "형법해석학적 관점에서 응보론의 재조명", 비교형사법연구, 5(1) (2001), 한국비교형사법학회
  6. 박상식, "범죄피해자의 의견진술술권에 관한 연구", 피해자학연구, 14(1) (2006), 한국피해자학회
  7. 배종대, "형사정책 (제7전정판)" (2008), 홍문사
  8. 법원행정처, "형사소송법 개정법률해설" (2007), 법원행정처
  9. 서병훈, "공리주의" (2007), 책세상
  10. 신동운, "형법총론 (제3판)" (2008), 법문사
  11. 심희기, "사법개혁에 대한 평가와 전망" (2007), 형사정책연구원
  12. 오영근, "형사사법체계상 회복적 사법의 실천방안" (2006), 한국형사정책연구원
  13. 윤동호, "피해자의 의사와 형사절차", 피해자학연구, 14(1), pp.117~146 (2006), 한국피해자학회
  14. 이용식, "형사피해자의 지위에 대한 소고", 피해자학연구, 14(1), pp.5~22 (2006), 한국피해자학회
  15. 이용식, "형벌론과 형사실체법에서 피해자의 역할", 피해자학연구, 15(1), pp.93~110 (2007), 한국피해자학회
  16. 이윤호, "피해자학" (2007), 박영사
  17. 이재상, "신형사소송법 (제2판)" (2008), 박영사
  18. 장규원, "피해자학입문" (1999), 길안사
  19. 천진호, "범죄피해자의 권리 확보방안", 피해자학연구, 15(1), pp.5~36 (2007), 한국피해자학회
  20. 황지태, "사법개혁의 방향과 중요 쟁점에 대한 전문가 의식 조사" (2007), 형사정책연구원
  21. Hart,H.L.A, "The Concept of Law" (1961), Oxford
  22. Johnstone,G, "Restorative Justice" (2002), Willan Publishing
  23. Karmen,A.., "Crime Victims, 3rd ed" (1996), Wadsworth
  24. Pollock,J, "Ethics in Crime and Justice, 3rd ed" (1998), Wadsworth
  25. Schunemann, B, "Zur Stellung des Opfers im System der Strafrechtspflege" (1986), NStZ
  26. 宮澤浩一, "犯罪被害者と刑事司法" (1995), 成文堂
  27. 松村良之, "刑罰の社會心理學と犯罪被害者", 被害者學硏究, 14 (2004), 日本被害者學會
  28. 齊藤誠二, "刑罰の正當性の根據をめぐって”, 宮澤浩一先生古稀祝賀論文集 第2卷 -刑法理論の現代的展開" (2000), 成文堂
  29. 小木曾綾, "刑事手續の犯罪被害者", 被害者學硏究, 14 (2004), 日本被害者學會

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (11건)