형사소송법상 공소시효제도의 개선방안
The ways to improve the statute of limitations on the criminal procedure law
0
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The statute of limitations is a law which forbids prosecutors from charging someone with a crime that was committed more than a specified number of years ago. After the period of the statute has run, the criminal is essentially free. The reasons for having statutes of limitations is as follows: As time passed, it is hard to find the substantive truth because memories fade away, physical evidence may be lost or contaminated, and witnesses are no longer available to testify for or against defendants; social criticism and concerns for the crime become undermined; the victim's anger is mitigated. However the development of scientific technology allows to obtain reliable evidence through DNA testing, restoration of documents and photos, and component analysis despite the passage of time. Also, even though time passes, the people's anger toward the crime is not allayed easily by several reasons such as extending the average life span and sharing the crime information based on advance of mass media. Questions are raised on whether the statute of limitations is reasonable in cases such as serial murder and child murder. Most developed countries such as United States, Germany, and France haven't a statute of limitations on serious crimes. Our neighboring country, Japan, also abolished statutes of limitations for some crimes by the revision of laws in 2010. Even in Korea, the national consensus has been formed it is unreasonable that persons who committed serious and brutal crimes are able to avoid prosecution and punishment for the passage of the duration determined by the criminal procedure law. In particular, it is alleged that a new statute of limitations should be examined in case of serious and brutal crimes, which led to abolish the statute of limitations on rape against children under the age of 13 or the disabled on the sexual violence special law. This dissertation first inquires into the statutes of limitations in Criminal Procedure Law and Special Criminal Law, and then examines the need for reform of the article 249 of Criminal Procedure Law which generally applies to all crimes. Futhermore, this paper attempts to study the different types of statutes of limitations and provide a direction for revision on the article 249 in Criminal Procedure Law.
Abstract
The statute of limitations is a law which forbids prosecutors from charging someone with a crime that was committed more than a specified number of years ago. After the period of the statute has run, the criminal is essentially free. The reasons for having statutes of limitations is as follows: As time passed, it is hard to find the substantive truth because memories fade away, physical evidence may be lost or contaminated, and witnesses are no longer available to testify for or against defendants; social criticism and concerns for the crime become undermined; the victim's anger is mitigated. However the development of scientific technology allows to obtain reliable evidence through DNA testing, restoration of documents and photos, and component analysis despite the passage of time. Also, even though time passes, the people's anger toward the crime is not allayed easily by several reasons such as extending the average life span and sharing the crime information based on advance of mass media. Questions are raised on whether the statute of limitations is reasonable in cases such as serial murder and child murder. Most developed countries such as United States, Germany, and France haven't a statute of limitations on serious crimes. Our neighboring country, Japan, also abolished statutes of limitations for some crimes by the revision of laws in 2010. Even in Korea, the national consensus has been formed it is unreasonable that persons who committed serious and brutal crimes are able to avoid prosecution and punishment for the passage of the duration determined by the criminal procedure law. In particular, it is alleged that a new statute of limitations should be examined in case of serious and brutal crimes, which led to abolish the statute of limitations on rape against children under the age of 13 or the disabled on the sexual violence special law. This dissertation first inquires into the statutes of limitations in Criminal Procedure Law and Special Criminal Law, and then examines the need for reform of the article 249 of Criminal Procedure Law which generally applies to all crimes. Futhermore, this paper attempts to study the different types of statutes of limitations and provide a direction for revision on the article 249 in Criminal Procedure Law.
참고문헌 (30)
- 박미숙, "공소시효제도에 관한 연구" (2004), 한국형사정책연구원
- 배종대, "신형사소송법 제3판" (2011), 홍문사
- 손동권, "형사소송법 개정신판" (2010), 세창출판사
- 신동운, "신형사소송법 제3판" (2011), 법문사
- 신양균, "형사소송법" (2010), 화산미디어
- 이영란, "한국 형사소송법" (2008), 나남
- 이재상, "신형사소송법" (2010), 박영사
- 정웅석, "형사소송법" (2009), 대명출판사
- 차용석, "형사소송법" (2008), 21세기사
- 강동범, "공소시효 연장에 관한 공청회 자료" (2006), 국회법제사법위원회
- 김상겸, "공소시효의 배제와 연장에 관한 헌법적 고찰", 헌법학연구, 12(3), pp.339~361 (2006), 한국헌법학회
- 민경식, "공소시효 연장에 관한 공청회 자료" (2006), 국회법제사법위원회
- 박상기, "공소시효배제입법 토론회 자료" (2002), 국가인권위원회
- 송광섭, "최근 형사제재입법의 동향과 그 효용성, 그리고 형벌의 본질", 동아법학, (49), pp.213~250 (2010), 법학연구소
- 이호중, "반인권적 국가범죄의 공소시효배제와 소급효", 민주법학, (30), pp.107~131 (2006), 민주주의법학연구회
- 장영수, "공소시효의 인권법적 문제점에 관한 헌법적 검토", 고려법학, (53), pp.111~130 (2009), 법학연구원
- 정승면, "공소시효 연장에 관한 공청회 자료" (2006), 국회법제사법위원회
- 조국, "반인권적 국가범죄의 공소시효의 정지 배제와 소급효금지의 원칙", 형사법연구, (17), pp.1~18 (2002), 한국형사법학회
- 하태영, "공소시효제도의 문제점과 개정방향", 비교형사법연구, 4(1) (2002)
- 하태훈, "공소시효배제입법 토론회 자료" (2002), 국가인권위원회
- Frédéric Desportes, "Traité de Procédure Pénale, Economica" (2009)
- Gerald D. Robin, "Is Time Running Out on Criminal Statutes of Limitations?", Law Bulletin ART 1, 1(47) (2011)
- 伊藤栄樹, (1996), 入花書房
- 平場安治, (1982), 青林書院新社
- 松尾浩也, (1999), 弘文堂
- 大澤裕, "人を死亡させた罪の公訴時効の改正(特集 公訴時効制度改革)", ジュリスト, (1404) (2010), 有斐閣
- 川出敏裕, "公訴時効制度の見直し論 について", 刑事法ジャーナル, (18) (2009), イウス出版
- 小池信太郎, "人を死亡させた罪の公訴時効の廃止・延長と遡及処罰禁止の妥当範囲", 刑事法ジャーナル, (26) (2010), イウス出版
- 古江頼隆, "凶悪・重大犯罪の公訴時効制度の見直しについて", (1385) (2009), 有斐閣
- 三島聡, "法律時評「逆風」のなかの公訴時効--「見えにくい」利益の保護をめぐって", 法律時報, 81(9) (2009), 日本評論社
