韩国少年法的最近动向

Abstract

Two major Acts on the substance and procedure of juvenile delinquent was passed during the plenary session of Korean National Assembly in November and promulgated in December 2007, and entered into force in June 2008. This paper introduces the two acts, i.e., “Juvenile Act” to deal with the type and dispositions of juvenile delinquent and “Act on Dispositions of Protected Juvenile, etc.” to regulate juvenile reformatory and Juvenile Classification Review Board, and makes some comments as well. The main outline of this paper is as follows: Chapter 1. Introduction Chapter 2. History of Korean Juvenile Act Chapter 3. Main Issues of Revised Acts on Juvenile Protection Chapter 4. Conclusion Appendix 1. Chinese Translation Table of Korean “Juvenile Act” 2. Chinese Translation Table of Korean “Act on Dispositions of Protected Juvenile, etc.” My evaluation on the recently revised Korean Juvenile Act can be summarized as follows: First, it is desirable to change difficult legal term into easy Korean one. Second, the range of age in juvenile protection cases was appropriately rearranged. The term “juveniles” was reduced to the person under the age of less than 19. It was extended to the juveniles who are 10 years of age or more but less than 14 years old who have committed acts in violation of Acts and subordinate statutes relating to criminal punishment. It was also expanded to the juveniles who are 10 years of age or more, fall under one of the following categories and in view of their character or environment, may be prone to commit acts in violation of Acts and subordinate statutes: (a) Juveniles who habitually move around in crowds and cause other persons a feeling of unrest; (b) Juveniles who run away from home without a justifiable reason; and (c) Juveniles who habitually make commotion under alcoholic influence or who habitually are in contact with harmful environment. Third, the introduction of public assistant system seems to be a good step for the real protection of due process and human rights of juveniles. Fourth, I think it makes institutional devices to find proper disposition for juvenile delinquent that a public prosecutor should review the pre-sentence report prepared by a classification review officer or a probation officer before making a final decision and that conditional suspension of indictment was codified. Fifth, it is prospective that the type of protective disposition is diversified and that the period of a certain disposition is somewhat adjusted. However, it is remaining task that the specific programs to realize restorative justice and other various rehabilitation programs for juvenile delinquent should be developed and specialized. Sixth, a more effective and systematic master plan needs to be prepared through the network of media, citizen, public service, industry, school and research institute, etc. based on the basic regulations for the prevention of juvenile delinquency.