불법적·반윤리적 목적의 승낙과 상해
Bodily Injury with Illegally or Immorally Purposed Consent
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
A subject of demand on appropriateness in accordance with social rules is thought to be the most important at behaviors by the consent. In other words, estimate of the action by criminal law shall be discussed not by an actor's internal will but by infringement upon legal interest at outside world. Either purpose or motive of the one who has infringed upon legal interest with consent shall not be considered at the estimate of appropriateness of social rules. Therefore, the subject that shall limit consent by social rules shall be not motives and purposes of the consent but ‘an action that infringes upon legal interest’ in accordance with the consent. What type of infringement upon legal interest does limit justification? The problem is related to ‘scope’ of the demand on appropriateness of social rules. Unless special provisions which punish crimes such as murder and abortion regardless of consent, Article 24 of the Criminal Act shall be applied to the crimes of all of private legal interests considering legislation purpose and systematic position. Majority of the scholars think that infringement upon legal interest of other crime types than aforementioned crimes require appropriateness of social rules, and ‘bodily injury’ with consent can be of problem. Considering various kinds of spectrum of bodily injury, the discussion has reached ‘degree’ of demand on appropriateness of social rules, in other words, scope of the permit of bodily injury subject to the consent. The value and specialty of legal interest of bodily injury subject to the consent can be discussed: But, medical treatment for beauty care, minor bodily injury and others that have minor bodily injury with consent of entity of legal interest need not be protected by the Criminal Act. When bodily injury subject to the consent jeopardizes existence of legal entity to threaten life or equivalent and to be serious, punishment against the action is thought to be admitted despite consent. Article 258(Aggravated Bodily Injury) of the Criminal Act can be used for reference.
Abstract
A subject of demand on appropriateness in accordance with social rules is thought to be the most important at behaviors by the consent. In other words, estimate of the action by criminal law shall be discussed not by an actor's internal will but by infringement upon legal interest at outside world. Either purpose or motive of the one who has infringed upon legal interest with consent shall not be considered at the estimate of appropriateness of social rules. Therefore, the subject that shall limit consent by social rules shall be not motives and purposes of the consent but ‘an action that infringes upon legal interest’ in accordance with the consent. What type of infringement upon legal interest does limit justification? The problem is related to ‘scope’ of the demand on appropriateness of social rules. Unless special provisions which punish crimes such as murder and abortion regardless of consent, Article 24 of the Criminal Act shall be applied to the crimes of all of private legal interests considering legislation purpose and systematic position. Majority of the scholars think that infringement upon legal interest of other crime types than aforementioned crimes require appropriateness of social rules, and ‘bodily injury’ with consent can be of problem. Considering various kinds of spectrum of bodily injury, the discussion has reached ‘degree’ of demand on appropriateness of social rules, in other words, scope of the permit of bodily injury subject to the consent. The value and specialty of legal interest of bodily injury subject to the consent can be discussed: But, medical treatment for beauty care, minor bodily injury and others that have minor bodily injury with consent of entity of legal interest need not be protected by the Criminal Act. When bodily injury subject to the consent jeopardizes existence of legal entity to threaten life or equivalent and to be serious, punishment against the action is thought to be admitted despite consent. Article 258(Aggravated Bodily Injury) of the Criminal Act can be used for reference.
참고문헌 (28)
- 김일수, "형법총론(제11판)" (2006), 박영사
- 박상기, "형법총론(제 7 판)" (2007), 박영사
- 배종대, "형법총론(제10판)" (2011), 홍문사
- 성낙현, "형법총론(제 2 판)" (2011), 동방문화사
- 신동운, "형법총론(제 5 판)" (2010), 법문사
- 이재상, "형법총론(제 6 판)" (2008), 박영사
- 임웅, "형법총론(개정판보정)" (2006), 법문사
- 정성근, "형법총론(제 3 판)" (2006), 삼지원
- 정웅석, "형법강의(전정 제 1 판)" (2008), 대명출판사
- 진계호, "형법총론(제 8 판)" (2007), 대왕사
- "형법개정법률안 제안이유서(형사법개정자료 ⅩⅣ)", 법무부, ~ (1992)
- "소위원회심의결과(형사법개정자료 Ⅷ)", 형사법개정특별심의위원회, ~ (1989)
- 이용식, "하자있는 피해자의 동의", 고시계, pp.163~172 (1998)
- 전지연, "형법상 피해자의 동의", 차용석박사화갑기념논문집, 법문사, 253~270 (1994)
- 井田良, "刑法總論の理論構造" (2005), 成文堂
- 大塚仁, "刑法槪說(總論)(第3 版)" (2002), 有斐閣
- 大谷實, "刑法講義總論(第3 版)" (1992), 成文堂
- 齊藤誠二, "刑法における生命の保護(第3 訂版)" (1992), 多賀出版
- 佐伯仁志, "被害者の承諾の取扱いをめぐって", 現代刑事法, 6(3) (2004), 現代法律出版
- 團藤重光, ")" (1988), 創文社
- 內藤謙, "刑法講義總論(中)" (1991), 有斐閣
- 中山硏一, "刑法總論" (1984), 成文堂
- 西田典之, "刑法の爭點(第3 版)" (2000), 有斐閣
- 野龍一, "刑法總論(Ⅱ)" (1990), 有斐閣
- 福田平, "刑法總論(全訂第3 版增補)" (2001), 有斐閣
- 前田雅英, "刑法總論講義(第3 版)" (2003), 東京大學出版會
- 山口厚, "刑法總論" (2004), 有斐閣
- 山中敬一, "刑法總論(Ⅰ)" (1999), 成文堂
