기업형사책임과 책임원칙
Corporate Criminal Liability and Guilt Principle - a landmark ruling on joint provision and review on guilt principle -
0
조회
0
다운로드
10
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
On 27 November 2007, the Korean Constitutional Court declared in a landmark ruling that the joint penal provision cannot be found constitutional because it violates the guilt principle guaranteed by Korean Constitution. Thus lots of laws that include the joint provision has been revised. However, Corporate Criminal Liability according to the new joint penal provision is still unclear to construe the concept of corporate guilt. The underlying basic problems consist in the conflicts triggered by different qualities of the reception of foreign legal system, especially continental civil law system and Anglo-American common law system. If one wishes to make the revised joint provision fit to guilty principle, it would, in any event, be necessary to adopt and transform basic concepts of criminal law so that they 'fit' the special characteristics of a legal person. Whether or not such transformation is possible and, if so, desirable is the issue on which the debate in Korea, Germany and the United States has centered. This paper takes a closer look at the requirements for corporate criminal liability according to the joint provision. Three questions, 'Corporations Do Not Act?', 'Corporations Cannot be Morally Guilty?', and 'Criminal Sanctions Do Not Apply to Corporations?', have been fully illustrated and analysed from a prospective of guilty principle. The author concludes with a few sceptical relativistic remarks on the revision of joint penal provision triggered by a landmark ruling of Korean Constitutional Court.
Abstract
On 27 November 2007, the Korean Constitutional Court declared in a landmark ruling that the joint penal provision cannot be found constitutional because it violates the guilt principle guaranteed by Korean Constitution. Thus lots of laws that include the joint provision has been revised. However, Corporate Criminal Liability according to the new joint penal provision is still unclear to construe the concept of corporate guilt. The underlying basic problems consist in the conflicts triggered by different qualities of the reception of foreign legal system, especially continental civil law system and Anglo-American common law system. If one wishes to make the revised joint provision fit to guilty principle, it would, in any event, be necessary to adopt and transform basic concepts of criminal law so that they 'fit' the special characteristics of a legal person. Whether or not such transformation is possible and, if so, desirable is the issue on which the debate in Korea, Germany and the United States has centered. This paper takes a closer look at the requirements for corporate criminal liability according to the joint provision. Three questions, 'Corporations Do Not Act?', 'Corporations Cannot be Morally Guilty?', and 'Criminal Sanctions Do Not Apply to Corporations?', have been fully illustrated and analysed from a prospective of guilty principle. The author concludes with a few sceptical relativistic remarks on the revision of joint penal provision triggered by a landmark ruling of Korean Constitutional Court.
참고문헌 (33)
- 양벌규정의 개선방안에 관한 연구(한국형사정책연구원 2008년도 대검찰청 연구용역보고서, 양벌규정의 개선방안에 관한 연구), "박미숙", ~ (2008)
- 배종대, "법인의 범죄능력", 고시연구, 9, pp.155~ (1991)
- 조병선, (1995), 박영사
- 조병선, "환경형법", pp.315~ (1998), 청주대학교출판부
- 조병선, "질서위반법", pp.312~ (1991), 한국형사정책연구원
- 법무부, "질서위반행위규제법과 각국의 입법례", 196~ (2005)
- 조병선, "형벌과 행정벌의 구별과 정비", 형사법연구, (22), pp.385~ (2004)
- 조병선, "양벌규정의 구조와 행위자의 특정", 형법개정 및 양벌규정 개선 공청회, pp.207~ (2008)
- 조병선, "환경법에서의 기업책임 - 개정된 양벌규정과 질서위반행위규제법에 근거한 새로운 이론구성의 시론", 환경법연구, 31(1), pp.305~330 (2009), 한국환경법학회
- 조병선, "개정양벌규정에서의 기업의 형사책임: 과실추정설에 대한 반론", 형사정책, 21(1), pp.351~370 (2009), 한국형사정책학회
- 조병선, "형법에서의 행위자의 특정: 개인책임과 단체책임*", 서울대학교 법학, 50(2), pp.591~614 (2009), 법학연구소
- 행정안전부, "대한민국정부 관보 제16906호", ~ (2008)
- Ambos, K., "Article 25 note 4. in: Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (2nd edn.)", pp.475~ (2008), Beck, Hart, Nomos
- Bahnmüller, M., "Strafrechtliche Unternehmensverantwortlichkeit im europäischen Gemeinschaftsund Unionsrecht" (2004), Peter Lang
- Cho, Byung-Sun, "Umweltstrafrecht in der Republik Korea, Japan und der Bundesrepublik Deutschland", pp.1989
- Cho, Byung-Sun, "Die Rezeption des Europäischen Strafrechts in Korea. in: Recht und Kulturen", pp.234~ (2000), Peter Lang
- Cuesta, J. L. de la, "Auf dem Weg zu einem Strafrecht für juristische Personen - das spanische Strafrecht. in: Strafrecht und Wirtschaftsstrafrecht - Dogmatik, Rechtsvergleich, Rechtstatsachen", pp.527~ (2008), Heymanns
- Hefendehl, R., "Corporate Criminal Liability: Model Penal Code Section 2.07 and the Develpment in Western Legal Systems", Buff. Crim. L. R., 4, pp.283~289
- Heine, G., "Kollektive Verantwortlichkeit als neue Aufgabe im Spiegel der aktuellen europäischen Entwicklung. in: Jus Humanum. Grundlagen des Rechts und Strafrecht", pp.577~ (2003), Duncker & Humbl
- "Judgment of the International Military Tribunal (IMT) for the Trial of German Major War Criminals against Goring and others", 42~ (1946)
- Kremnitzer, M., "Die Strafbarkeit von Unternehmen", ZStW, 113, pp.538~ (2001)
- Kyriakakis, J., "Australian Prosecution of Corporations for International Crimes", JICJ, 5, pp.809~ (2007)
- Kyriakakis, J., "Corporation and the International Criminal Court: The Complimentary Objection Stripped Bare", Criminal Law Forum, 19, pp.115~ (2008)
- LaFave, W. R., "Substantive Criminal Law Vol. 2", pp.382~ (2003), West
- Leader, D., "Business and Human Rights - Time to Hold Companies to Account", International Criminal Law Review, 8, pp.447~449 (2008)
- "Model Penal Code 2.07(1)(a) (Proposed Official Draft 1962)", ~ (1962)
- Mourullo, R., "Das spanische Strafgesetzbuch auf dem Wege zur Verbandshaftung. in: Strafrecht und Wirtschaftsstrafrecht - Dogmatik, Rechtsvergleich, Rechtstatsachen", pp.545~ (2008), Heymanns
- "New York Cent. & Hudson R.R. Co., 212 U.S. 481", ~ (1909)
- Schünemann, "Unternehmenskriminalität und Strafrecht", pp.232~255 (1979), Heymannns
- Schünemann, "Strafrechtliche Sanktionen gegen Wirtschaftsunternehmen?. in: Strafrecht und Wirtschaftsstrafrecht - Dogmatik, Rechtsvergleich, Rechtstatsachen", pp.429~ (2008), Heymanns
- Kommission, "Auszug aus dem Abschlußbericht der Kommission. in: Reform des Sanktionsrechts: Verbandsstrafre Bd. 3", pp.351~ (2003), Nomos
- Weigend, T., "Societas delinquere non protest?", JICJ, 6, pp.927~ (2008)
- Wells, C., "Corporations and Criminal Responsibility (2nd edn.)" (2001), OUP