공동정범에서의 이탈에 관한 연구
A Study on the Separation from joint principal offenders
1
조회
0
다운로드
8
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Regulation on joint principal offenders in criminal law punishes each of criminals when more than 2 persons jointly commit crimes as principal offenders of the concerned crime. So it is possible that a defendant who commits crimes partially is responsible for the crime entirely. Furthermore, when a defendant separated from the relationship of joint principal offenders halfway the crime, but thereafter the crime is continued by an accomplice, the defendant should be responsible for the concerned crime. The reason why the seceder is responsible for the crime entirely is because the regulation on a criminal of abeyance in criminal law does neither explicitly specify that the regulation applies to complicity nor require the crime to be inconclusive and terminated. In the case of separation from the relationship of joint principal offenders, the scope of responsibility must be limited to the acts before the stage of separation. In the judicial precedents or theories of separation, the separation from the relationship of joint principal offenders is recognized boardly before the stage of the commencing execution. On the other hand the separation after the stage of commencing execution is recognized very limited. However a separation from joint principal offenders should be recognized independent of the timing and the standard for recognition is as follows: (1) a seceder has the intention of separation; (2) before as well as after the stage of the commencing execution, a seceder must cut off the causal relationship between conspiracy and the crime of others. In order to recognize the separation, the seceder must strive for the deterring the crime; (3) the seceder does not have to declare his/her intention for separation explicitly. Provided that the separation is recognized,the seceder is responsible for the act taken place before the separation. Lastly, in order to apply the regulation of the criminal of abeyance to the relationship of joint principal offenders, it is desirable that the standard for recognition of separation be enacted in the Article 26 of The Criminal Act.
Abstract
Regulation on joint principal offenders in criminal law punishes each of criminals when more than 2 persons jointly commit crimes as principal offenders of the concerned crime. So it is possible that a defendant who commits crimes partially is responsible for the crime entirely. Furthermore, when a defendant separated from the relationship of joint principal offenders halfway the crime, but thereafter the crime is continued by an accomplice, the defendant should be responsible for the concerned crime. The reason why the seceder is responsible for the crime entirely is because the regulation on a criminal of abeyance in criminal law does neither explicitly specify that the regulation applies to complicity nor require the crime to be inconclusive and terminated. In the case of separation from the relationship of joint principal offenders, the scope of responsibility must be limited to the acts before the stage of separation. In the judicial precedents or theories of separation, the separation from the relationship of joint principal offenders is recognized boardly before the stage of the commencing execution. On the other hand the separation after the stage of commencing execution is recognized very limited. However a separation from joint principal offenders should be recognized independent of the timing and the standard for recognition is as follows: (1) a seceder has the intention of separation; (2) before as well as after the stage of the commencing execution, a seceder must cut off the causal relationship between conspiracy and the crime of others. In order to recognize the separation, the seceder must strive for the deterring the crime; (3) the seceder does not have to declare his/her intention for separation explicitly. Provided that the separation is recognized,the seceder is responsible for the act taken place before the separation. Lastly, in order to apply the regulation of the criminal of abeyance to the relationship of joint principal offenders, it is desirable that the standard for recognition of separation be enacted in the Article 26 of The Criminal Act.
참고문헌 (47)
- 권오걸, "형법총론" (2007), 형설출판사
- 김성천, "형법총론 (제3판)" (2005), 동현출판사
- 김일수, "(새로 쓴)형법총론 (제11판)" (2006), 박영사
- 박상기, "형법총론" (2009), 박영사
- 배종대, "형법총론 (제10판)" (2011), 홍문사
- 배종대, "형법총론 (제9판)" (2008), 홍문사
- 백원기, "미수론연구" (1995), 삼지원
- 손해목, "형법총론" (1996), 법문사
- 신동운, "형법총론 (제3판)" (2008), 법문사
- 신동운, "형법총론 (제6판)" (2011), 법문사
- 오영근, "형법총론" (2009), 박영사
- 이영란, "형법학 총론강의 (개정판)" (2010), 형설출판사
- 이재상, "형법총론 (제6판)" (2008), 박영사
- 이형국, "형법총론" (1990), 법문사
- 임웅, "형법총론 (개정판 보정)" (2005), 법문사
- 정웅석, "형법강의" (2008), 大明出版社
- 葛原力三, "일본판례의 정범개념이 공범이론의 학설에 미친 영향", 법학연구, 21(3), pp.1~32 (2010), 법학연구소
- 권창국, "공범관계의 이탈 및 공범의 중지에 대한 검토", JURIST, (395) (2003), 청림인터렉티브
- 김용세, "공모공동정범과 공범관계 이탈론; 대법원 판례를 중심으로", 대전사회과학논문집, (2), pp.16~ (1997)
- 김용세, "공모관계이탈과 공범의 중지", 형사법연구, 13 (2000)
- 민유숙, "공범관계로부터의 이탈-실행 착수 전과 실행 착수 후-(2002. 8. 27. 선고 2001도 513 판결: 공2002하, 2369)", 대법원판례해설, (43) (2003)
- 손동권, "중지미수범의 특수문제-특히 예비단계의 중지", 형사판례연구, 5 (1997), 박영사
- 이용식, "공동자 중 1인의 실행착수 이전 범행이탈-공동정범의 처벌한계-", 형사판례연구, 11 (2003), 박영사
- 이원경, "기능적 행위지배와 공모공동정범의 정범성", 형사법연구, 22(2), pp.59~86 (2010), 한국형사법학회
- 이한진, "공범의 중지(미수)와 공범관계로부터의 이탈", 법학연구, 8 (2001), 서울대학교법과대학
- 장한철, "결과발생에 있어서 공범의 중지미수의 성립문제-특히 독일 형법 제24조 제2항 2문 후단을 중심으로-", 형사법연구, (8) (1995)
- 조준현, "공범관계의 해소에 관한 사례연구", 형사판례연구, 5 (1997), 박영사
- 조준현, "공범관계의 해소에 관한 사례연구, In 박양빈교수화갑기념논문집" (1996)
- 차용석, "공모관계에서의 이탈", 법률신문 1986년 5월 19일, ~ (1986)
- 최호진, "기능적 행위지배와 공모공동정범", 법학논고, (32), pp.631~655 (2010), 법학연구원
- 黃 一晧, "공범관계로부터의 이탈이론과 그 인정기준", 중앙법학, 10(1), pp.189~222 (2008), 중앙법학회
- 백정민, "공동정범의 정범성표지와 이탈에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2009
- 송승은, "형법상 중지미수범에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2006
- 이원경, "공모공동정범에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2009
- 大塚仁, "刑法槪說 (總論)" (1992), 有斐閣
- 大塚仁, "大コンメンタ―ル刑法 第3卷 (第2版)" (1999), 靑林書院
- 法曹会, "最高裁判所判例解說: 刑事篇" (1989)
- 山中敬一, "ロ―スク―ル講義 刑法總論" (2007), 成文堂
- 淺田和茂, "刑法總論(補正版)" (2007), 成文堂
- 平野龍一, "刑法總論Ⅱ" (1975), 有斐閣
- 香川達夫, "刑法講義(總論)" (1995), 成文堂
- 香川達夫, "共犯處罰の根據" (1988), 成文堂
- 大越義久, "刑法の基本判例", 刑法の基本判例, 3 (1988), 法學敎室 別冊 基本判例シリ-ズ
- 西田典之, "共犯の中止について:共犯からの離脫と共犯の中止犯", 法學協會雜誌, 2(100) (1983), 東京大學法學協會
- 原田保, "共犯と中止犯, In 刑法判例百選Ⅰ(ジュリスト別冊 142号)(4版)" (1997), 有斐閣
- 前田雅英, "共同正犯からの離脫", 判例時報, (1333) (1990)
- 井上正治, "共犯と中止犯, In 刑事判例演習: 刑法總論 (平野龍一 著, 權五柄 譯編)" (1961), 日新社
