군형법 제92조의5 계간 그 밖의 추행죄 비판 - 군인간 합의동성애 형사처벌의 당부 -
The Unconstitutionality of the Crime of Sodomy in the Korean Military Penal Code
0
조회
0
다운로드
17
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
"Sodomy or any other sexual molestation between military service members" is criminalized by the Korean Military Penal Code, while homosexual activities between civilians are de-criminalized. The Article 92-5 of the Code has applied to consensual homosexual activities as well as non-consensual. The Supreme Court has not made it clear whether or not the Article applies to heterosexual sodomy, while it held the Article does not apply to the sodomy between a military service member and a civilian. While the National Commission of Human Rights recommended several times that the Article is discriminatory and should be revised, the Constitutional Court in 2002 and 2011 upheld it is constitutional. First, this essay begins with reviewing the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Article 92-5 and examining the two decisions of the Constitutional Court. The two Courts have maintained that the Article 92-5 is necessary to keep military discipline or capacity and the vague part of the Article may be clarified by the judicial interpretations. Second, this essay discusses the legal policy and judicial decisions of the major OECD countries regarding homosexual activities in the military. Then, this essay argues that the Article 92-5 is unconstitutional in that it violates the right of sexual self-determination and privacy of military service members under the name of national security or military discipline; it is too vague to specify the scope of punishable conducts, for instance, it is not clear whether or not homosexual activities out of the military is punishable; it is not "the less restrictive sanction"but over-criminalization for military discipline or capacity may be maintained by the use of administrative sanctions. Finally, this essay proposes to abolish the Article 92-5, use administrative sanctions against public homosexual activities in the military, and add a new provision to punish sexual molestation by deceit or force.
Abstract
"Sodomy or any other sexual molestation between military service members" is criminalized by the Korean Military Penal Code, while homosexual activities between civilians are de-criminalized. The Article 92-5 of the Code has applied to consensual homosexual activities as well as non-consensual. The Supreme Court has not made it clear whether or not the Article applies to heterosexual sodomy, while it held the Article does not apply to the sodomy between a military service member and a civilian. While the National Commission of Human Rights recommended several times that the Article is discriminatory and should be revised, the Constitutional Court in 2002 and 2011 upheld it is constitutional. First, this essay begins with reviewing the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Article 92-5 and examining the two decisions of the Constitutional Court. The two Courts have maintained that the Article 92-5 is necessary to keep military discipline or capacity and the vague part of the Article may be clarified by the judicial interpretations. Second, this essay discusses the legal policy and judicial decisions of the major OECD countries regarding homosexual activities in the military. Then, this essay argues that the Article 92-5 is unconstitutional in that it violates the right of sexual self-determination and privacy of military service members under the name of national security or military discipline; it is too vague to specify the scope of punishable conducts, for instance, it is not clear whether or not homosexual activities out of the military is punishable; it is not "the less restrictive sanction"but over-criminalization for military discipline or capacity may be maintained by the use of administrative sanctions. Finally, this essay proposes to abolish the Article 92-5, use administrative sanctions against public homosexual activities in the military, and add a new provision to punish sexual molestation by deceit or force.
참고문헌 (32)
- "29 Eur. H. R. Rep. 49" (1999)[URL]
- "29 Eur. H. R. Rep. 548" (1999)[URL]
- Aaron Belkin, "Embser-Herbert, The International Experience, in The U.S. Military's “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” Policy: A Reference Handbook 59", pp.61~62
- "BVerwG, NJW 1991,11.27", ~ (1991)
- "Comm. No. 488/1992, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/50/D/488/1992" (1994)[URL]
- "Führungshilfe für Vorgesetzte, Bd.2., A, Ⅲ, 7", ~
- Morton J. Horwitz, "The Supreme Court, 1992 Term―Foreword: the Constitution of Change: Legal Fundamentality Without Fundamentalism", Harv. L. Rev, 107(32), pp.32~41 (1993)
- "Gays in Foreign Militaries 2010: A Global Primer 137" (2010)[URL]
- Theresa M. Suozzi, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, or Lie-N-Hide? Congressional Codification of Military Exclusion: A Constitutional Analysis", Syracuse Journal of Legislation and Policy, 1(169) (1995)
- William J. Brennan, Jr., "Constitutional Adjudication", Notre Dame L. Rev, 40(559), pp.563~ (1965)
- 강달천, "동성애자의 기본권에 대한 연구", 박사, pp.2000
- 공자그 그 라로크, "동성애", 2007
- "전원위원회 결정 06진차87 군대내 동성애자 사병에 대한 인권침해 및 차별", 국가인권위원회[URL]
- "군형법」제92조에 대한 위헌법률심판(2008헌가21)에 대한 결정", 국가인권위원회[URL]
- "2007-2011 국가인권정책기본계획 권고안", 국가인권위원회[URL]
- 군대 내 성폭력 실태조사, "국가인권위원회", 22~23 (2004)
- 병영내 동성애자 관리정책에 대한 연구-외국 사례분석을 중심으로, "국방부 인권팀", 46~ (2007)
- 노기호, "군형법 제92조 “추행죄”의 위헌성 고찰 ― 육군 제22사단 보통군사법원 2008.8.6. 위헌제청결정사건(2008고10)을 중심으로 ―", 헌법학연구, 15(2), pp.263~300 (2009), 한국헌법학회
- 동성애자인권연대, "군 관련 성소수자 인권증진을 위한 프로젝트 모둠자료집", pp.88~89 (2008)
- 육군본부법무실, "군형법주해", pp.383~ (2010)
- 육성철, "세상을 향해 어퍼컷", pp.105~106 (2008)
- 이경환, "군대내 동성애 행위의 처벌에 관하여", 공익과 인권, 5(1), pp.67~68 (2008)
- 이호중, "군형법 제92조의5 추행죄의 위헌성과 폐지론", 형사법연구, 23(1), pp.229~264 (2011), 한국형사법학회
- 이호중, "성폭력범죄의 친고죄 폐지론, In 성폭력, 법정에 서다", pp.219~255 (2007)
- 임웅, "비범죄화의 이론", pp.83~ (1999)
- 한인섭, "성적 소수자의 인권" (2002)
- 한채윤, "성적 소수자 차별의 본질과 실제 그리고 해소방안, In 성적 소수자의 인권", pp.47~48 (2002)
