본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

공전자기록 위작·변작죄에서 위작·변작의 개념

Definition of False Preparation or Alteration in the crime of False Preparation or Alteration of Public Electromagnetic Records

0

조회

0

다운로드

9

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

This study reviews the definition of false preparation and alteration in the crime of false preparation or alteration of public electromagnetic records(Article 227-2 of Criminal Act). Article 227-2 of Criminal Act protects the trustworthiness of the general public concerning the authenticity of public electromagnetic records, not the accuracy of information processing with electromagnetic record. Additionally in view of the fact that electromagnetic record crimes(Article 227-2 and Article 232-2 of Criminal Act) was enacted by following the form and contents of document crimes, the stand of Criminal Act which takes formalism(punishment of unauthorized preparation of document) on document crimes in principle, materialism(punishment of preparation of false document) exceptionally should be accomplished. So false preparation means to make an electromagnetic record without authority and alteration means to change the contents of a ready-made electromagnetic record without authority. This interpretation results from the systematic analyses of the penal clauses of crimes concerning documents and electromagnetic records, not from the mechanical identity of document with electromagnetic record. So I don’t agree with this judgement of the Supreme Court(2013do9003). Although we can not deny the necessity and worthiness of punishment of the preparation of false public electromagnetic record, the act of defendant cannot be punished by Article 227-2. In order to punish the preparation of false public electromagnetic records, it’s necessary to legislate a new clause. I think the terms of false preparation and alteration of public electromagnetic records are not appropriate, because these are very unfamiliar and confused with counterfeit or alteration of official document(Article 225 of Criminal Act) and private document(Article 232 of Criminal Act). So I recommend “to make an electromagnetic record without authority and to change the contents of a ready-made electromagnetic record without authority, instead of false preparation(falsification) or alteration of public and private electromagnetic records(Article 227-2 and Article 232-2 of Criminal Act). And as a result it needs to legislate a new clause that punishes the preparation of false public electromagnetic records.

Abstract

This study reviews the definition of false preparation and alteration in the crime of false preparation or alteration of public electromagnetic records(Article 227-2 of Criminal Act). Article 227-2 of Criminal Act protects the trustworthiness of the general public concerning the authenticity of public electromagnetic records, not the accuracy of information processing with electromagnetic record. Additionally in view of the fact that electromagnetic record crimes(Article 227-2 and Article 232-2 of Criminal Act) was enacted by following the form and contents of document crimes, the stand of Criminal Act which takes formalism(punishment of unauthorized preparation of document) on document crimes in principle, materialism(punishment of preparation of false document) exceptionally should be accomplished. So false preparation means to make an electromagnetic record without authority and alteration means to change the contents of a ready-made electromagnetic record without authority. This interpretation results from the systematic analyses of the penal clauses of crimes concerning documents and electromagnetic records, not from the mechanical identity of document with electromagnetic record. So I don’t agree with this judgement of the Supreme Court(2013do9003). Although we can not deny the necessity and worthiness of punishment of the preparation of false public electromagnetic record, the act of defendant cannot be punished by Article 227-2. In order to punish the preparation of false public electromagnetic records, it’s necessary to legislate a new clause. I think the terms of false preparation and alteration of public electromagnetic records are not appropriate, because these are very unfamiliar and confused with counterfeit or alteration of official document(Article 225 of Criminal Act) and private document(Article 232 of Criminal Act). So I recommend “to make an electromagnetic record without authority and to change the contents of a ready-made electromagnetic record without authority, instead of false preparation(falsification) or alteration of public and private electromagnetic records(Article 227-2 and Article 232-2 of Criminal Act). And as a result it needs to legislate a new clause that punishes the preparation of false public electromagnetic records.

참고문헌 (36)

  1. 김성돈, "형법각론" (2014), SKKUP
  2. 김일수, "새로쓴 형법각론" (2015), 박영사
  3. 박상기, "형법각론(제8판)" (2011), 박영사
  4. 배종대, "형법각론" (2015), 홍문사
  5. 손해목, "주석 형법(Ⅳ)" (1997), 한국사법행정학회
  6. 오기두, (2006), 한국사법행정학회
  7. 오영근, "형법각론 제3판" (2014), 박영사
  8. 이재상, "형법각론 제10판" (2016), 박영사
  9. 임웅, "형법각론" (2015), 법문사
  10. 강동범, "일본개정형법의 컴퓨터범죄규정에 대한 비판적 검토", 형사정책, (4) (1990), 한국형사정책학회
  11. 강동범, "컴퓨터범죄와 개정형법", 법조, (491) (1997)
  12. 노태악, "새로운 정보매체의 등장과 형벌법규의 해석", 사법연수원 논문집, 3 (2006)
  13. 심준보, "공전자기록위·변작죄에서 위작과 변작의 개념", 대법원판례해설, (56) (2005)
  14. 이철, "컴퓨터범죄에 대한 형사법적 고찰", 법조, 38(2) (1989)
  15. 장영민, "형법개정안의 컴퓨터범죄", 형사정책연구, 3(2)통권 : 10, pp.89~ (1992), 한국형사정책연구원
  16. 장영민, "허위공전자기록 작성행위의 죄책", 형사재판의 제문제, 5 (2005), 형사실무연구회
  17. 高橋則夫, "刑法各論" (2014), 成文堂
  18. 大谷 實, "刑法講義各論" (2015), 成文堂
  19. 大塚 仁, "刑法槪說(各論)" (2005), 有斐閣
  20. 山口 厚, "刑法各論" (2005), 有斐閣
  21. 山中敬一, "刑法各論" (2015), 成文堂
  22. 西田典之, "刑法各論" (2010), 弘文堂
  23. 松宮孝明, "刑法各論講義" (2006), 成文堂
  24. 林 幹人, "刑法各論" (2007), 東京大學出版會
  25. 前田雅英, "刑法各論講義" (2015), 東京大學出版會
  26. 中森喜彦, "刑法各論" (2015), 有斐閣
  27. 足立昌勝, "コンピユ-タ犯罪と現 代刑法" (1990), 三省堂
  28. 大谷實, "コンピユ-タ關聯犯罪と刑法の一部改正(中)", 判例タイムズ, (645)
  29. 米澤慶治, "刑法等一部改正法の槪要", ジュリスト, (889)
  30. 山口厚, "電磁的記錄と文書犯罪規定の改正", ジユリスト, (885)
  31. 神山敏雄, "コンピユ-タ犯罪立法の批判的考察", 法律時報, 60(1)
  32. 中森喜彦, "コンピユ-タ犯罪と刑法の一部改正", 法學敎室 (1987)
  33. 的場純男, "コンピユ-タ犯罪と刑法の一部改正", 金融法務事情, (1159)
  34. 鶴田六郞, "コンピユ-タ關連犯罪と刑法の一部改正", 商事法務, (1113)
  35. Schönke, "Strafgesetzbuch Kommentar" (2006)
  36. "Nomos Kommentar Strafgesetzbuch" (2010)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (19건)