본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

주취운전의 죄수(罪數)에 대한 고찰

A Study on the Counting for DUI

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

Violations of traffic laws and regulations mostly consist of several overlaid violative actions in traffic accidents, resulting in uncertainty of the number of violations, or crimes. Therefore, administrative agencies consistently tend to deal with traffic violation cases through relatively light punishments to get rid of disputes related. In particular, there are many cases in which DUI and negligent injury/manslaughter, or DUI and dangerous driving injury/manslaughter occur together as in the case when the driver does not take attention when drunk and injures/kills a man. In addition, for actions related to DUI, it is a very difficult problem to apply laws and guilt by clearly distinguishing the actions. This is because it is a problem of how the overlapping of criteria of constitution should be interpreted. Therefore, it should be reviewed how to harmonize the various factors in determining the guilt and understand these stepwise and systematically during the discussions on the criteria of guilt determination. Based on this, if we review the guilt determination on traffic violations related to DUI, it is as follows: in the cases of DUI and unlicensed driving, imaginary concurrence, in case of DUI and refusal of driver alcohol test, actual concurrence, in case of DUI and grave negligent injury/manslaughter, imaginary concurrence and in case of DUI and dangerous driving injury/manslaughter, imaginary concurrence can be acknowledged, respectively. In that sense, this study aims at contributing to the development of traffic culture in Korea by theoretically establishing a standard for the number of violations, or crimes, against traffic laws and regulations which are closely related with our daily lives.

Abstract

Violations of traffic laws and regulations mostly consist of several overlaid violative actions in traffic accidents, resulting in uncertainty of the number of violations, or crimes. Therefore, administrative agencies consistently tend to deal with traffic violation cases through relatively light punishments to get rid of disputes related. In particular, there are many cases in which DUI and negligent injury/manslaughter, or DUI and dangerous driving injury/manslaughter occur together as in the case when the driver does not take attention when drunk and injures/kills a man. In addition, for actions related to DUI, it is a very difficult problem to apply laws and guilt by clearly distinguishing the actions. This is because it is a problem of how the overlapping of criteria of constitution should be interpreted. Therefore, it should be reviewed how to harmonize the various factors in determining the guilt and understand these stepwise and systematically during the discussions on the criteria of guilt determination. Based on this, if we review the guilt determination on traffic violations related to DUI, it is as follows: in the cases of DUI and unlicensed driving, imaginary concurrence, in case of DUI and refusal of driver alcohol test, actual concurrence, in case of DUI and grave negligent injury/manslaughter, imaginary concurrence and in case of DUI and dangerous driving injury/manslaughter, imaginary concurrence can be acknowledged, respectively. In that sense, this study aims at contributing to the development of traffic culture in Korea by theoretically establishing a standard for the number of violations, or crimes, against traffic laws and regulations which are closely related with our daily lives.

참고문헌 (41)

  1. 위험운전치사상죄의 형법전편입문제, "강우예", 형사정책연구원, ~ (2010)
  2. 김남현, "도로교통법상 처벌규정에 관한 약간의 고찰", 법학연구, 12(3), pp.209~256 (2002), 법학연구원
  3. 김용욱, "경합론의 체계적 구조, 동암 이형국교수 화갑논문집" (1998)
  4. 김정환, "위험운전치사상죄와 음주운전죄의 관계", 형사법연구, 21(2), pp.299~324 (2009), 한국형사법학회
  5. 김성돈, "형법총론(제2판)" (2011), 성균관대학교 출판부
  6. 김성돈, "형법상 죄수론의 구조", 형사법연구, (9) (1997)
  7. 김성돈, "죄수결정의 기준", 법학논고, 14 (1998), 경북대학교 법학연구소
  8. 김성천, "형법총론(제5판)" (2012), 소진
  9. 김일수, "형법총론(제10판)" (2004), 박영사
  10. 김형준, "위험운전치사상죄와 음주운전죄의 관계", 중앙법학, 11(2), pp.591~613 (2009), 중앙법학회
  11. 박상기, "형법총론(제8판)" (2009), 박영사
  12. 박광민, "연속범이론의 재검토", 형사법연구, (13) (2000), 한국형사법학회
  13. 백형구, "형법상의 일죄의 기준과 분류", 월간고시 (1987)
  14. 배종대, "형법총론(제11판)" (2013), 홍문사
  15. 법무부 형사법제과, "독일형법", ~ (2008)
  16. 법무부, "형사법제과, In 일본형법" (2007)
  17. 손기식, "이른바 악질 교통사범에 대한 일본의 입법례와 우리에 대한 시사점", 법조, 54(10), pp.188~211 (2005), 법조협회
  18. 신동운, "형법총론(제7판)" (2013), 법문사
  19. 김재윤, "새로운 형법총론" (2011), 율곡출판사
  20. 이재상, "형법총론(제7판)" (2011), 박영사
  21. 이정원, "형법총론" (2012), 신론사
  22. 임웅, "형법총론(제5판)" (2013), 법문사
  23. 임웅, "죄수론의 기초, 박양빈교수 화갑기념논문집" (1996)
  24. 오영근, "형법총론(제2판 보정판)" (2012), 박영사
  25. 오영근, "죄수론에 관한 연구", 법학논총, 18 (2001), 한양대학교 법학연구소
  26. 이경렬, "죄수론의 체계구성에 관한 시론", 비교형사법연구, (2) (2000), 한국비교형사법학회
  27. 이기헌, "경합범과 상상적 경합", 형사판례연구, 7 (1999), 형사판례연구회
  28. 이영란, "형법학(총론강의, 제3판)" (2011), 형설출판사
  29. 이훈동, "죄수론의 신체계", 형사법연구, (7) (1994)
  30. 윤동호, "공소사실의 동일성 판단기준과 죄수 및 경합론의 관계", 박사, 법학, pp.2005
  31. 진계호, "형법총론(제8판)" (2007), 대왕사
  32. 정성근, "형법총론(제5판)" (2011), 삼양사
  33. 정혜욱, "죄수론의 판단구조에 관한 연구", 원광법학, 28(3), pp.83~110 (2012), 법학연구소
  34. 官川基, "危險運轉致死傷罪の解釋論上の諸問題", 現代刑事法, 5(5) (2003)
  35. 左伯仁志, "交通犯罪に關す刑法改正", 法學敎室, (258) (2002)
  36. 伊藤榮樹, "特別刑法 第6卷, 交通法·通信法 I" (1982), 立花書房
  37. 廷山英雄, "刑法判例百選 I, 總論(第2版)" (1984), 有裵各
  38. 山中敬一, "刑法各論 I" (2004), 成文堂
  39. 西田典之, "刑法各論(第4版)" (2007), 弘文堂
  40. Maurach, "Gössel", Zipf, Gössel, pp.Zipf, Strafrecht AT, 7. Aufl., 1989[DOI]
  41. Jescheck, "Lehrbuch des Strafrechts", pp.5~ (1996)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (10건)