본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

명예훼손죄의 해석, 적용상의 몇 가지 문제

Several Problems on Interpretation and Application of Defamation

0

조회

0

다운로드

16

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

Defamation is the crime of which occurs ordinary, even though defamation or libel is serious crime in Korean Criminal Act. However, sometimes it is doubt whether it is really criminal or not that some case where becomes the problem as expected even until of fact like this form becomes the defamation. If only ‘statement of fact (assertion of fact, fact disclosure)’ is sufficient of the defamation provisions, it fulfills individual criminal component easily, such a criminal act must not be illegal in so far as defamation itself is true and contribute to public interest. These problems are stem from its provision in our criminal act is too vague and wide. It is because the establishment precise standard in justifying of defamation is insufficient from theory or practical parts. The prohibition provisions of criminal law are common in every human community from the point whose it is general to punish the harmful behavior to community. Meanwhile, it has different features in its specific contents because of historical and cultural background. It becomes known well where also the case of defamation. This study aids to several problems on interpretation and application of defamation, especially the provision of defamation and its justification. First of all, the article 307 (1) of criminal act is too wide and vague as it mentioned, so it does not accomplish the function. Secondly, it examined general justification provisions which are not functioned besides article 310 of criminal act. The article 310 of criminal act is a ‘special’ provision, but it does not override or cast by other general justification provisions. And It is reconfirmed that the article 310 is not the exclusive other justification provisions, but ‘specially’ legislate because of justification of the case related defamation in the political, press activity.

Abstract

Defamation is the crime of which occurs ordinary, even though defamation or libel is serious crime in Korean Criminal Act. However, sometimes it is doubt whether it is really criminal or not that some case where becomes the problem as expected even until of fact like this form becomes the defamation. If only ‘statement of fact (assertion of fact, fact disclosure)’ is sufficient of the defamation provisions, it fulfills individual criminal component easily, such a criminal act must not be illegal in so far as defamation itself is true and contribute to public interest. These problems are stem from its provision in our criminal act is too vague and wide. It is because the establishment precise standard in justifying of defamation is insufficient from theory or practical parts. The prohibition provisions of criminal law are common in every human community from the point whose it is general to punish the harmful behavior to community. Meanwhile, it has different features in its specific contents because of historical and cultural background. It becomes known well where also the case of defamation. This study aids to several problems on interpretation and application of defamation, especially the provision of defamation and its justification. First of all, the article 307 (1) of criminal act is too wide and vague as it mentioned, so it does not accomplish the function. Secondly, it examined general justification provisions which are not functioned besides article 310 of criminal act. The article 310 of criminal act is a ‘special’ provision, but it does not override or cast by other general justification provisions. And It is reconfirmed that the article 310 is not the exclusive other justification provisions, but ‘specially’ legislate because of justification of the case related defamation in the political, press activity.

참고문헌 (19)

  1. 김일수, "한국형법" (1997), 박영사
  2. 김일수, "名譽毁損罪를 어떻게 理解할 것인가?", 안암법학, (창간) (1993)
  3. 김수길, "명예훼손죄의 법리에 관한 소고", 법과 정책, (창간) (1995), 제주대학교 법과 정책 연구소
  4. 김상호, "언론의 명예훼손", 비교형사법연구, (창간) (1999)
  5. 배종대, ""형법각론"제5판" (2003), 홍문사
  6. 윤훈표, "고려시대 명예와 수치심의 사회적 배경과 기준-지배층의 관직과 사생활을 중심으로", 동방학지 (2006)
  7. 강준만, "대중매체 법과 윤리" (2001), 인물과 사상사
  8. 표성수, "언론과 명예훼손" (1997), 육법사
  9. 손원선, "한국ㆍ독일 민법에 있어서 표현의 자유와 명예보호-위법성과 책임에 관한 비교법적 고찰", 한독법학, 14 (2003)
  10. 김송옥, "미국 명예훼손의 법리에 관한 연구", 법정논총, (36) (2001), 중앙대학교
  11. 남흥우, "형법강의(각론)" (1965), 고려대학교 출판부
  12. 김종원, "형법각론(상권)" (1965), 법문사
  13. 신? 평, "명예훼손법" (2004), 청림출판
  14. 정영석, "형법각론" (1972), 법문사
  15. 유기천, "전정신판" (1982), 일조각
  16. 신? 평, "새로운 명예훼손법 체계의 구축에 관한 시도", 공법연구, 31(3) (2003)
  17. 이형국, "형법상 위법성 관련조문과 그 체계적 정비방안" (2006), 한국형사정책연구원
  18. 문채규, "형법 제310조에 대한 규범이론적 접근", 안암법학, 11 (2000)
  19. 한국형사정책연구원, "형법제정자료집" (1990), 한국형사정책연구원

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (11건)