문서 부정행사죄의 불법과 권한중심 해석
Unlawful Uttering of Document and Authority-Focused Interpretation
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The Criminal Act has regulations of criminal punishment against illegal use of authenticated document. The one who has made out document without authority and/or false document with authority shall be punished in the use of document. But, punishment against use of document truly made by authorized person is thought to be exceptional considering benefit of document crime of “public reliability on the document.” Then, what’s the meaning of“unlawful uttering” may be of problem. Supreme Court's judicial precedent has adopted not only authority of use of document but also original usage of document to judge illegal use and has made four cases to have different legal judgment. But this study adopted authority of use of document as an only standard for unlawful uttering considering differences depending upon rights in document crimes, and interpretation of various kinds of ‘illegal use’ from point of view of the Criminal Act and related special laws. Unlawful uttering has no reason to judge depending upon original usage of the document, and extends scope of punishment at punishment against unlawful uttering of document up to other purpose of use. The loss and damage at other purpose of use is out of scope of legal benefit of unlawful uttering is thought to be inappropriate. To admit of unlawful uttering from point of view of Supreme Court's judicial precedent, expansion of scope of original usage may expand scope of the punishment to violate principle of Nullum Crimen, Nulla Poena Sine Lege. In this case, Supreme Court's judgment that did not admit of unlawful uttering was thought to be appropriate, but Supreme Court's basic position that followed judgment standard of original usage than authority of the use should be reconsidered.
Abstract
The Criminal Act has regulations of criminal punishment against illegal use of authenticated document. The one who has made out document without authority and/or false document with authority shall be punished in the use of document. But, punishment against use of document truly made by authorized person is thought to be exceptional considering benefit of document crime of “public reliability on the document.” Then, what’s the meaning of“unlawful uttering” may be of problem. Supreme Court's judicial precedent has adopted not only authority of use of document but also original usage of document to judge illegal use and has made four cases to have different legal judgment. But this study adopted authority of use of document as an only standard for unlawful uttering considering differences depending upon rights in document crimes, and interpretation of various kinds of ‘illegal use’ from point of view of the Criminal Act and related special laws. Unlawful uttering has no reason to judge depending upon original usage of the document, and extends scope of punishment at punishment against unlawful uttering of document up to other purpose of use. The loss and damage at other purpose of use is out of scope of legal benefit of unlawful uttering is thought to be inappropriate. To admit of unlawful uttering from point of view of Supreme Court's judicial precedent, expansion of scope of original usage may expand scope of the punishment to violate principle of Nullum Crimen, Nulla Poena Sine Lege. In this case, Supreme Court's judgment that did not admit of unlawful uttering was thought to be appropriate, but Supreme Court's basic position that followed judgment standard of original usage than authority of the use should be reconsidered.
참고문헌 (11)
- 위조범죄의 실태 및 유형별 대처 방안에 관한 연구, "황지태", 한국형사정책연구원, ~ (2011)
- 권기훈, "대법원판례해설 제45호(2003 상반기)", pp.735~746 (2004), 법원도서관
- 김재환, "대법원판례해설 제70호(2007 상)", pp.194~208 (2007), 법원도서관
- 문채규, "공․사문서의 부정행사죄에서 부정행사의 개념", 법학연구, 53(4), pp.21~48 (2012), 법학연구소
- 박상기, "공문서등부정행사죄", 형사판례연구, 8, pp.283~293 (2000), 박영사
- 송승은, "문서의 부정행사죄에 있어서 ‘부정행사’의 개념", 비교형사법연구, 10(1), pp.225~251 (2008), 한국비교형사법학회
- 윤영철, "형법 제230조(공문서부정행사죄)에 있어서 “부정행사”의 개념", 비교형사법연구, 5(1), pp.649~666 (2003), 한국비교형사법학회
- 이경렬, "타인의 운전면허증 제시행위와 공문서부정행사죄의 부정행사", 고시연구, pp.184~194 (2003), 고시연구사
- 이현식, "공문서 간접무형 위조죄에 관한 고찰", 법학연구, 3, pp.43~53 (1975), 전북대학교 법학연구소
- 정성근, "유형위조와 무형위조", 법조, 28(2), pp.40~53 (1979), 법조협회
- 천진호, "공문서부정행사죄에 있어서 부정행사", 형사법연구, (17), pp.167~186 (2002), 한국형사법학회
