본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

교통사고처리특례법 제4조 제1항의 위헌결정에 대한 형사정책적 검토

0

조회

0

다운로드

7

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

The ruling that declared the restriction of right of arraignment according to exemption law is unconstitutional in case of grieve bodily harm regardless of light/heavy negligence poses several problems. This is especially the case in heavy negligence, but it is in overall problematic in execution levels if negligence is not considered. Even though heavy negligence is not seen as a weighing factor of professional negligence and instead either is seen as a weighing factor of normal negligence in criminal law, the ruling completely ignores this. It is also problematic in that heavy negligence is not a solid concept and leaves much to the judgement of the jury. In addition, the fact that decision of heavy negligence depends on doctor's opinion is also a problem. The unconstitutional declaration saw the exemption law as a violation of the equality rights, but it actually helps the people's convenience by speeding up the process of compensation, and the differentiation of death and heavy negligence is according to their inherent differences. The exemption law serves its purpose by transferring the loss of property of victims to the car insurance and preventing the mass production of ex-convicts.

Abstract

The ruling that declared the restriction of right of arraignment according to exemption law is unconstitutional in case of grieve bodily harm regardless of light/heavy negligence poses several problems. This is especially the case in heavy negligence, but it is in overall problematic in execution levels if negligence is not considered. Even though heavy negligence is not seen as a weighing factor of professional negligence and instead either is seen as a weighing factor of normal negligence in criminal law, the ruling completely ignores this. It is also problematic in that heavy negligence is not a solid concept and leaves much to the judgement of the jury. In addition, the fact that decision of heavy negligence depends on doctor's opinion is also a problem. The unconstitutional declaration saw the exemption law as a violation of the equality rights, but it actually helps the people's convenience by speeding up the process of compensation, and the differentiation of death and heavy negligence is according to their inherent differences. The exemption law serves its purpose by transferring the loss of property of victims to the car insurance and preventing the mass production of ex-convicts.

참고문헌 (24)

  1. 김성돈, "형법각론" (2008), SKKUP
  2. 김성돈, "형법총론" (2008), 성균관대학교출판부(SKKUP)
  3. 박상기, "형법각론" (2008), 박영사
  4. 배종대, "형법각론" (2010), 홍문사
  5. 손동권, "형법각론(개정판)" (2005), 율곡출판사
  6. 오영근, "신형법입문" (2009), 박영사
  7. 오영근, "형법각론" (2009), 박영사
  8. 이승현, "교통사고처리특례법과 중상해. in: 한국법정책학회 2009학술대회자료집" (2009)
  9. 이재상, "형법총론" (2008), 박영사
  10. 이정원, "형법각론" (1999), 법지사
  11. 이형국, "형법각론연구Ⅰ" (1997), 법문사
  12. 임웅, "형법각론(개정판)" (2005), 법문사
  13. 정성근, "형법각론" (2002), 삼지원
  14. 정영일, "형법각론" (2008), 박영사
  15. 정웅석, "형법강의" (2005), 대명출판사
  16. 교통사고운전자처벌등에관한 특례법안 심사보고서, "국회 내무위원회", ~ (1981)
  17. 범죄백서, "법무연수원", ~ (2008)
  18. "대법원 1961. 3. 22. 선고 4294형상5", ~ (1961)
  19. "대법원 1977. 3. 8. 선고 77도409", ~ (1977)
  20. "대법원 1977. 6. 28. 선고 77도403", ~ (1977)
  21. "대법원 1980. 10. 14. 선고 79도305", ~ (1980)
  22. "대법원 1984. 2. 14. 선고 83도3086", ~ (1984)
  23. "대법원 2009. 10. 29. 선고 2009도5753", ~ (2009)
  24. "헌재 1997. 1. 16, 90헌마110", ~ (1997)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (18건)