친고죄와 반의사불벌죄의 근거와 현행법제의 타당성 연구
A Study on the Bases of Indictment Subject to Complaint and Penalty Subject to Consent, and the Justifiability of the Current Law
0
조회
0
다운로드
18
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Most countries’ criminal systems operate under the principle of the state’s exclusive power over criminal procedure, where the state will exercise its powers of criminal procedure regardless of the victim’s opinion. The rationale is that the public interest in the fair and consistent exercise of the state’s criminal penalty power to indict every crime. However, the Korean Criminal Act and certain special Acts provide for indictment subject to complaint and penalty subject to consent, which serve as exceptions to or limitations on the principle of the state’s exclusive power over criminal procedure. Under the current law, making the indictment of a crime subject to complaint is a matter of legislative policy where its rationality is recognized so long as the public interest in imposing penalties upon crimes is greater than the interest in restraining the criminal penalty power by leaving the choice for its exercise to the person entitled to file a complaint. On this basis, different crimes may have different reasons to have their indictment made subject to complaint. Namely, making indictment subject to complaint is based on varied criminal-policy considerations. Based on the rationale behind such indictment subject to complaint and penalty subject to consent provisions, this paper has reviewed these previsions in the current Criminal Act, Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, Etc., of Sexual Crimes, Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse, and Copyright Act. Though the Criminal Act and related special Acts made indictment of certain sexually violent crimes subject to complaint to prevent infringement on the victim’s reputation or privacy due to the crime becoming public, there have been arguments that the provision serves more to indemnify sexually violent criminals from punishment rather than to protect victims, voiding both the general and specific deterrent effect of criminal law and encouraging recidivism. Based on such arguments the amendment of the Criminal Act and related special Acts in December 2012 removed provisions making indictment of sexual crimes such as rape subject to victim complaint. Furthermore, affected by the conclusion of the Korea-U.S. FTA, the Copyright Act was amended in 2008 to decrease the scope of crimes whose indictment is subject to complaint. Afterward, through two additional amendments the Copyright Act added new obligatory provisions and made according changes in the penalty provisions. Though some commentators criticize the remaining crimes in the Copyright Act whose indictment is subject to complaint, copyright materials are not exclusively subject to copyright holders’ rights. They have a public goods component in that the general public effect changes in ideas and opinions by using others’ works and fuel new works by such use, making such works and their usage the source of development in human culture. Therefore it is justifiable to make the indictment and punishment of copyright violations subject to the copyright holders’ complaint. Meanwhile, the bill for the partial amendment of the Criminal Act submitted by Assembly Member Park Yeong-seon and ten others on June 12, 2012 proposed amending Article 312 to make the indictment of all crimes against reputation subject to complaint so that these crimes would not be used for political purposes by politically motivated prosecutors. Considering the reality of investigative practice, where investigation on the crime of libel, also listed as a crime whose penalty is subject to complaint, only commences on the complaint of an individual entitled to file a complaint such as the victim, the amendment bill is justified in making the indictment of all crimes against reputation subject to criminal complaint.
Abstract
Most countries’ criminal systems operate under the principle of the state’s exclusive power over criminal procedure, where the state will exercise its powers of criminal procedure regardless of the victim’s opinion. The rationale is that the public interest in the fair and consistent exercise of the state’s criminal penalty power to indict every crime. However, the Korean Criminal Act and certain special Acts provide for indictment subject to complaint and penalty subject to consent, which serve as exceptions to or limitations on the principle of the state’s exclusive power over criminal procedure. Under the current law, making the indictment of a crime subject to complaint is a matter of legislative policy where its rationality is recognized so long as the public interest in imposing penalties upon crimes is greater than the interest in restraining the criminal penalty power by leaving the choice for its exercise to the person entitled to file a complaint. On this basis, different crimes may have different reasons to have their indictment made subject to complaint. Namely, making indictment subject to complaint is based on varied criminal-policy considerations. Based on the rationale behind such indictment subject to complaint and penalty subject to consent provisions, this paper has reviewed these previsions in the current Criminal Act, Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, Etc., of Sexual Crimes, Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles from Sexual Abuse, and Copyright Act. Though the Criminal Act and related special Acts made indictment of certain sexually violent crimes subject to complaint to prevent infringement on the victim’s reputation or privacy due to the crime becoming public, there have been arguments that the provision serves more to indemnify sexually violent criminals from punishment rather than to protect victims, voiding both the general and specific deterrent effect of criminal law and encouraging recidivism. Based on such arguments the amendment of the Criminal Act and related special Acts in December 2012 removed provisions making indictment of sexual crimes such as rape subject to victim complaint. Furthermore, affected by the conclusion of the Korea-U.S. FTA, the Copyright Act was amended in 2008 to decrease the scope of crimes whose indictment is subject to complaint. Afterward, through two additional amendments the Copyright Act added new obligatory provisions and made according changes in the penalty provisions. Though some commentators criticize the remaining crimes in the Copyright Act whose indictment is subject to complaint, copyright materials are not exclusively subject to copyright holders’ rights. They have a public goods component in that the general public effect changes in ideas and opinions by using others’ works and fuel new works by such use, making such works and their usage the source of development in human culture. Therefore it is justifiable to make the indictment and punishment of copyright violations subject to the copyright holders’ complaint. Meanwhile, the bill for the partial amendment of the Criminal Act submitted by Assembly Member Park Yeong-seon and ten others on June 12, 2012 proposed amending Article 312 to make the indictment of all crimes against reputation subject to complaint so that these crimes would not be used for political purposes by politically motivated prosecutors. Considering the reality of investigative practice, where investigation on the crime of libel, also listed as a crime whose penalty is subject to complaint, only commences on the complaint of an individual entitled to file a complaint such as the victim, the amendment bill is justified in making the indictment of all crimes against reputation subject to criminal complaint.
참고문헌 (29)
- 박상기, "독일형법사" (1993), 율곡출판사
- 고소제도에 관한 연구, "박상기", 한국형사정책연구원, ~ (1997)
- 이상정, "저작권법개설" (2012), 세창출판사
- 신동운, "신형사소송법 제4판" (2012), 법문사
- 오승종, "저작권법" (2012), 박영사
- 이재상, "형법총론" (2011), 박영사
- 이재상, "형법각론" (2012), 박영사
- 이재상, "형사소송법" (2012), 박영사
- 이해완, "저작권법" (2012), 박영사
- 임웅, "형법총론" (2010), 법문사
- 실무자를 위한 저작권법, "임원선", 한국저작권위원회, ~ (2012)
- 정상조, "저작권법 주해" (2007), 박영사
- 박광민, "전정판 형법총론" (2012), 성균관대학교 출판부
- 오영근, "형법총론" (2009), 박영사
- 곽병선, "성범죄에 대한 비판적 검토-피해자의 관점에서-", 피해자학연구, 14(1), pp.147~170 (2006), 한국피해자학회
- 김선복, "친고죄에 대한 고찰", 형사법연구, (10) (1998)
- 김정환, "저작권법상 범죄의 비친고죄화에 대한 형사법적 검토", 산업재산권, (23)
- 김택수, "형사절차상 성폭력 피해자의 보호와 지위강화 : 프랑스와 한국간의 비교법적 고찰을 중심으로", 형사정책연구, 20(3)통권 : 79, pp.165~192 (2009), 한국형사정책연구원
- 친고죄와 고소불가분의 원칙 - 그 문제점 및 개선방향, "박달현", ~
- 서보학, "형사절차상 성범죄 피해아동 보호방안", 형사정책연구, 7(4) (1996)
- 서보학, "성폭력범죄와 형법정책", 현상과 인식, 22(1·2) (1998)
- 유숙영, "성폭력범죄의 친고죄적용에 대한 검토", 한국여성학, 19(1)
- 이승현, "아동 · 청소년 성범죄관련 처벌규정의 문제점과 개선방안", 형사정책, 21(2), pp.33~61 (2009), 한국형사정책학회
- 이희경, "성폭력범죄의 비친고죄화 방안", 가천법학, 5(3), pp.115~136 (2012), 법학연구소
- 정현미, "성폭력범죄의 형사절차상 이차적 피해", 피해자학연구, (8) (2000)
- 조국, "여성주의 관점에서 본 성폭력범죄", 서울대학교 법학, 43(2) (2002)
- Jescheck, "Lehrbuch des Strafrechts : Allgemeiner Teil, 5., vollst. neue bearb. und erw" (1996), Duncker & Humblot
- Schönke, "Strafgesetzbuch, 27" (2006), Beck
- Weigend, Thomas, "Deliktsopfer und Strafverfahren" (1989), Duncker
