본문 바로가기
KERD
논문

재물손괴에 있어 친족상도례 적용배제의 불합리성과 그 대안

The Irrationality and Alternative of Applicable Exclusion of Special Exception to Relatives with respect to Crimes of Destruction and Damage of Property

0

조회

0

다운로드

8

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

Special Exception to Relatives implies that it applies to special treatments to be able to remit a punishment, file a suit, and so on, considering relatives’ identity in case of property crimes between them under the Criminal Act. However, it is contradict that the destruction and damage of property, a misdemeanor, is only punished because it excludes the application of special exception to relatives and the destruction and damage of property with committing felonies such as robbery,extortion, fraud, etc becomes an unpunishable expost facto act which at the same time, applies to special exception to relatives not punished. Therefore, the destruction and damage of property considering equity of other property crimes shall apply to special exception to relatives Crimes infringing one’s body and freedom under the Criminal Act also regulate a charge dropping by victim's consent and crime attaching to victim's charge which accept the limit of the state’s punitive right by means of a victim’s intent, whereas the destruction and damage of another’s property, a misdemeanor, is punished because it does not apply to a crime attaching to victim's charge and charge dropping by victim's consent. Consequently, the destruction and damage of property between no relatives shall apply to a crime attaching to victim's charge and charge dropping by victim's consent, one of which is a crime attaching to victim's charge to apply to it because it is historically a fundamental no criminal act, but currently a criminal act. Originally, it is rational and appropriate for all of the criminal law systems that the destruction and damage of property shall apply to a crime attaching to victim's charge other than a charge dropping by victim's consent when regulated a no criminal act into a criminal act. The charge dropping by victim's consent has priority over a crime attaching to victim's charge with respect to the starting time of the state’s punitive right so that the scope of the self-regulating resolution is close enough between victim and perpetrator. In conclusion, the destruction and damage of property shall be enacted in order to apply to special exception to relatives as another’s property crime to balance equity and fairness with other property crimes and it is natural that the destruction and damage of property which is not related with relatives shall apply to a crime attaching to victim's charge for all of the criminal law system.

Abstract

Special Exception to Relatives implies that it applies to special treatments to be able to remit a punishment, file a suit, and so on, considering relatives’ identity in case of property crimes between them under the Criminal Act. However, it is contradict that the destruction and damage of property, a misdemeanor, is only punished because it excludes the application of special exception to relatives and the destruction and damage of property with committing felonies such as robbery,extortion, fraud, etc becomes an unpunishable expost facto act which at the same time, applies to special exception to relatives not punished. Therefore, the destruction and damage of property considering equity of other property crimes shall apply to special exception to relatives Crimes infringing one’s body and freedom under the Criminal Act also regulate a charge dropping by victim's consent and crime attaching to victim's charge which accept the limit of the state’s punitive right by means of a victim’s intent, whereas the destruction and damage of another’s property, a misdemeanor, is punished because it does not apply to a crime attaching to victim's charge and charge dropping by victim's consent. Consequently, the destruction and damage of property between no relatives shall apply to a crime attaching to victim's charge and charge dropping by victim's consent, one of which is a crime attaching to victim's charge to apply to it because it is historically a fundamental no criminal act, but currently a criminal act. Originally, it is rational and appropriate for all of the criminal law systems that the destruction and damage of property shall apply to a crime attaching to victim's charge other than a charge dropping by victim's consent when regulated a no criminal act into a criminal act. The charge dropping by victim's consent has priority over a crime attaching to victim's charge with respect to the starting time of the state’s punitive right so that the scope of the self-regulating resolution is close enough between victim and perpetrator. In conclusion, the destruction and damage of property shall be enacted in order to apply to special exception to relatives as another’s property crime to balance equity and fairness with other property crimes and it is natural that the destruction and damage of property which is not related with relatives shall apply to a crime attaching to victim's charge for all of the criminal law system.

참고문헌 (46)

  1. 권오걸, (2009), 헝설출판사
  2. 김성돈, "형법각론" (2009), 성균관대학교 출판부
  3. 김성천, "형법각론" (2006), 동현출판사
  4. 김일수, "새로쓴 형법각론(제7판)" (2007), 박영사
  5. 이은모, (2011), 박영사
  6. 박기석, "폭력행위등처벌에관한법률의 개정론과 폐지론 - 형사특별법의 전반적 정비 관점에서", 형사정책연구, 17(1), pp.117~150 (2006), 한국형사정책연구원
  7. 박상기, "형법각론(제8판)" (2011), 박영사
  8. 박상열, "형사소송법(개정판)" (2009), 형설출판사
  9. 배종대, "형법각론(제7전정판)" (2010), 홍문사
  10. 배종대, "신형사소송법(제4판)" (2012), 홍문사
  11. 백형구, "알기쉬운 형사소송법(제4판)" (2007), 박영사
  12. 손동권, "형법각론(제3개정판)" (2010), 율곡출판사
  13. 손동권, "형사소송법 개정신판" (2010), 세창출판사
  14. 신동운, "신형사소송법" (2008), 법문사
  15. 신동운, "형법 제`개정 자료집" (2009), 한국형사정책연구원
  16. 신동운, "형법제정자료집" (1990), 한국형사정책연구원
  17. 신양균, "형사소송법(신판)" (2010), 화산미디어
  18. 신양균, "형사특별법 정비방안(5) 폭력행위등처벌에관한법률" (2008), 한국형사정책연구원
  19. 오영근, "형법각론" (2009), 박영사
  20. 이영란, "형법학(각론강의)" (2008), 형설출판사
  21. 이은모, (2011), 박영사
  22. 이재상, "형법각론(제7판)" (2010), 박영사
  23. 이재상, "형사소송법(제9판)" (2012), 박영사
  24. 이형국, "형법각론" (2007), 법문사
  25. 임동규, "형사소송법(제8판)" (2012), 법문사
  26. 임웅, "비범죄화의 이론" (1999), 법문사
  27. 임웅, "형법각론(제3전정판 보정)" (2011), 법문사
  28. 정성근, "형법각론(제4판)" (2011), 삼영사
  29. 정웅석, "사례형사소송법(전정제4판)" (2011), 대명출판사
  30. 차용석, "형사소송법(제3판)" (2008), 21세기사
  31. 최관식, "형법각론" (2009), 三宇社
  32. 형법개정연구회, "형사법개정연구(Ⅳ), 형법각칙 개정안" (2009), 한국형사정책연구원
  33. "형사법개정자료(ⅩⅣ), 형법개정법률안 제안이유서", 법무부, ~ (1992)
  34. 형사입법연구회, "2011년도 형법.형사소송법 및 형사특별법-제개정안 분석과 입법정책 개선방안" (2011), 한국형사정책연구원
  35. , '헌재결 2009.11.26, 2008헌바58'을 중심으로, "사법행정", 2010, ~, pp.한국사법행정학회
  36. 강동범, "친고죄에 있어 공소전 수사의 허용 여부", 고시계 (1997), 고시계사
  37. 박달현, "반의사불벌죄와 고소불가분의 원칙", 법조, 53(5), pp.168~190 (2004), 법조협회
  38. 박달현, "보충성의 원칙과 친고죄의 본질", 비교형사법연구, 3(1) (2001), 한국비교형사법학회
  39. 신동운, "반의사불벌죄와 고소취소", 고시연구 (1994), 고시연구사
  40. 윤동호, "피해자의 의사와 형사절차", 피해자학연구, 14(1), pp.117~146 (2006), 한국피해자학회
  41. 이종갑, "지적재산권 침해범죄에 대한 형사법적 검토 - 비친고죄 개정 논의를 중심으로 -", 법학연구, 17(2), pp.165~193 (2009), 법학연구소
  42. 이천현, "재산범죄 분야의 개정에 관한 소고", 법학논총, 27(1), pp.85~110 (2010), 법학연구소
  43. 이천현, "친족관계에 따른 형법상의 효과, 문제점과 개선방안을 중심으로", 형사정책연구 (2001), 한국형사정책연구원
  44. 장진호, "현대사회와 친족상도례의 모순과 개선방안", 법조, (463) (1995), 법조협회
  45. 정성근, "친족상도례", 고시연구 (1994), 고시연구사
  46. 정영일, "고소불가분의 원칙", 고시연구 (1997), 고시연구사

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (13건)