우리나라 양형기준에 대한 고찰
Study on the Korean Sentencing Guidelines
1
조회
0
다운로드
17
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Korea's new sentencing guidelines, was first published in 2009, is accepted as a turning point of sentencing system. But based on the preparation period and the lack of data and limits as a new attempt, it is now indicated many controversial points and received modification requirements in many ways by many researchers. This article presents some suggestions for the current sentencing guidelines in the direction of improvement. First, it should be declared that the purpose and principle of sentencing are in legitimate implementation of responsibility. Of course, the purpose of the prevention, but prevention can be subsumed in a range of sentencing purpose, is only limited by the upper and lower limits of responsibility. But this problem is not only for sentencing guidelines but also for the Penal Code. Next, relatively low sentencing range, specially the recommendational area in under the sentence presented by the Penal Code and relatively wide sentencing area, which is pointed out by many researchers, seems to require certain reforming actions. It may be reviewed that segmentation of recommendational area or type of crime, showing the starting point of sentencing in the recommendational area etc. Furthermore sentencing gueidelines for the monetary penalty should be made immediately and the provision for 'discreational reduction by judge' should be amended. Lastly, with regard to the sex crimes sentencing guidelines, reductional factors like a 'considerable amount of deposit' or 'unwished for penalty should be reconsiderd with an aim of abolition of provision about 'requiring a formal complaint from the victim'.
Abstract
Korea's new sentencing guidelines, was first published in 2009, is accepted as a turning point of sentencing system. But based on the preparation period and the lack of data and limits as a new attempt, it is now indicated many controversial points and received modification requirements in many ways by many researchers. This article presents some suggestions for the current sentencing guidelines in the direction of improvement. First, it should be declared that the purpose and principle of sentencing are in legitimate implementation of responsibility. Of course, the purpose of the prevention, but prevention can be subsumed in a range of sentencing purpose, is only limited by the upper and lower limits of responsibility. But this problem is not only for sentencing guidelines but also for the Penal Code. Next, relatively low sentencing range, specially the recommendational area in under the sentence presented by the Penal Code and relatively wide sentencing area, which is pointed out by many researchers, seems to require certain reforming actions. It may be reviewed that segmentation of recommendational area or type of crime, showing the starting point of sentencing in the recommendational area etc. Furthermore sentencing gueidelines for the monetary penalty should be made immediately and the provision for 'discreational reduction by judge' should be amended. Lastly, with regard to the sex crimes sentencing guidelines, reductional factors like a 'considerable amount of deposit' or 'unwished for penalty should be reconsiderd with an aim of abolition of provision about 'requiring a formal complaint from the victim'.
참고문헌 (26)
- 양형이 범죄억제에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구, "김정욱", 대검찰청 용역과제, ~ (2011)
- 양형 관련 형사법 개정 방안 연구, "김혜경", 대검찰청 용역보고서, ~ (2011)
- 노성호, "성폭력범죄의 양형실태에 관한 연구" (1999), 한국형사정책연구원
- 법원행정처, "양형실무" (1999)
- 양형위원회, "양형기준, - 살인, 뇌물, 성범죄(수정기준 포함), 강도, 횡령․배임, 위증, 무고(2010. 7. 15. 기준)", ~ (2010)
- 조국, "형사법의 성편향" (2003), 박영사
- 최석윤, "현행 양형조사제도의 문제점과 개선방안, 형사정책과 사법제도에 관한 연구(Ⅳ)-양형기준제 시행에 따른 양형합리화정책 성과분석 및 평가-" (2010), 형사정책연구원
- 김동현, "인지과학적 관점에서 바라본 자유의지와형사책임론의 문제", 서울대학교 법학, 51(4), pp.269~315 (2010), 법학연구소
- 김영종, "위증․무고범죄 양형기준안 지정토론문", 양형기준안 제2차 공청회자료집 (2009), 양형위원회
- 김혜정, "형의 가중 및 감경사유에 대한 검토 - 작량감경 사유를 포함하여 -", 형사법연구, 23(4), pp.33~58 (2011), 한국형사법학회
- 노명선, "실무운영을 통해서 본 작량감경 규정에 대한 비판적 고찰과 개선방안", 홍익법학, 11(3), pp.339~378 (2010), 법학연구소
- 박강우, "대법원 양형기준안과 바람직한 양형개혁의 방향", 저스티스, (114), pp.206~229 (2009), 한국법학원
- 서보학, "양형기준의 시행에 대한 평가와 개선방향", 형사법연구, 23(4), pp.59~86 (2011), 한국형사법학회
- 송문호, "상습범 및 누범의 대책에 관한 문제점", 형사법연구, (16) (2001)
- 안동준, "누범가중의 타당성과 실효성", 비교형사법연구, (2) (2000)
- 오영근, "바람직한 양형기준의 방식", 형사정책연구, 20(1), pp.347~370 (2009), 한국형사정책연구원
- 이보영, "누범가중처벌은 책임원칙에 반하는지 여부", 법학연구, (44), pp.265~288 (2011), 한국법학회
- 이승현, "아동 · 청소년 성범죄관련 처벌규정의 문제점과 개선방안", 형사정책, 21(2), pp.33~61 (2009), 한국형사정책학회
- 이주형, "최초 양형기준에 대한 비판적 고찰", 형사법의 신동향, (21) (2009)
- 이현정, "양형위원회의 양형기준안에 대한 비판적 고찰", 성균관법학, 21(1), pp.359~388 (2009), 법학연구소
- 이호중, "우리나라의 양형기준에 대한 비판적 분석", 형사법연구, 22(1), pp.241~272 (2010), 한국형사법학회
- 승재현, "우리나라 양형위원회 양형기준모델의 타당성 평가", 법조, 59(1), pp.87~135 (2010), 법조협회
- 승재현, "합리적 양형기준을 위한 공통된 양형인자 도출의 필요성 - 제 2기 양형위원회 양형기준 대상범죄 양형인자 도출의 통일성 위한 비교법적 고찰을 중심으로 -", 외법논집, 34(3), pp.165~176 (2010), 법학연구소
- 천진호, "양형기준제 시행의 문제점과 양형자료 조사제도 도입을 위한 제언", 형사법연구, 21(4), pp.251~272 (2009), 한국형사법학회
- 최석윤, "양형기준설정과 관련된 몇 가지 고려사항", 비교형사법연구, 10(1), pp.71~97 (2008), 한국비교형사법학회
- 최호진, "양형기준의 합리성 검토와 개선방향", 비교형사법연구, 11(2), pp.81~103 (2009), 한국비교형사법학회