책임범위이론에 기초한 현행 양형기준의 개선방안
Improvements in Sentencing Guidelines Based on Theory of Scope of Responsibility
0
조회
0
다운로드
12
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The existing sentencing guidelines can be positively assessed in that the guidelines pursued balance between sentencing theory and sentencing guidelines based on the theory of scope of responsibility, but the existing guidelines do not always accord with the theory because the existing guidelines excessively depended on sentencing practices in the past when scope of penality and sentencing factors are classified but did not mention modification of scope of responsibility. In this context, the author in this study considered appropriateness of the (adjusted) theory of scope of responsibility by reviewing sentencing theories to present measures of improvements in sentencing guidelines. The principles of the adjustment for improving sentencing guidelines can be as follows. First, scope of penalty should be modified and overlapping in the scope should be solved. Second, basic recommendation penalty should be established. Third, special sentencing factors and general sentencing factors should be adjusted. Special sentencing factors can be defined to be factors related to illegality and responsibility of criminal acts and general sentencing factors can be defined to be factors related to situations before and after a crime and prevention. Fourth, differentiation of behavior factors and agent/other factors should be removed. Fifth, scope of penalty should be specifically adjusted on the basis of the number of special sentencing factors.
Abstract
The existing sentencing guidelines can be positively assessed in that the guidelines pursued balance between sentencing theory and sentencing guidelines based on the theory of scope of responsibility, but the existing guidelines do not always accord with the theory because the existing guidelines excessively depended on sentencing practices in the past when scope of penality and sentencing factors are classified but did not mention modification of scope of responsibility. In this context, the author in this study considered appropriateness of the (adjusted) theory of scope of responsibility by reviewing sentencing theories to present measures of improvements in sentencing guidelines. The principles of the adjustment for improving sentencing guidelines can be as follows. First, scope of penalty should be modified and overlapping in the scope should be solved. Second, basic recommendation penalty should be established. Third, special sentencing factors and general sentencing factors should be adjusted. Special sentencing factors can be defined to be factors related to illegality and responsibility of criminal acts and general sentencing factors can be defined to be factors related to situations before and after a crime and prevention. Fourth, differentiation of behavior factors and agent/other factors should be removed. Fifth, scope of penalty should be specifically adjusted on the basis of the number of special sentencing factors.
참고문헌 (35)
- 우리나라 양형현황에 관한 기초보고, 양형위원회 전문위원 연구자료, "손철우", 양형위원회, 2~ (2008)
- 우리나라 양형관행의 일반적 문제점, 양형위원회 전문위원 연구자료, "이주형", 양형위원회, 35~ (2008)
- 이현정, "성폭력범죄의 양형에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2009
- 김성돈, "형법총론(제2판)", pp.769~ (2009), 성균관대학교 출판부
- 신치재, "양형의 기준, In 계산 성시탁 교수 화갑기념논문집", pp.555~ (1993), 한국사법행정학회
- 김영환, "양형의 형벌이론적 기초 및 개별적 양형단계에 관한 고찰", pp.111~ (1996), 형사정책연구원
- Dreher, "Zur Spielraumtheorie als der Grundlage der Strafzumessungslehre des Bundesgerichtshofs", JZ, pp.41~ (1967)
- Jescheck, "Lehrbuch des Strafrechts, AT, 4. Aufl", pp.768~ (1988)
- 범행비례적 양형이론에 관한 연구, "손동권", 형사정책연구원, 64~ (2006)
- 정철호, "양형이론에 대한 고찰", 형사정책, 15(2), pp.3~310 (2003), 한국형사정책학회
- 최석윤, "양형위원회와 양형이론", 형사정책연구, 18(3), pp.421~440 (2007), 한국형사정책연구원
- 김신규, "형법총론(초판)", pp.608~ (2009), 청목출판사
- 배종대, "형법총론(제9개정판)", pp.807~ (2008), 홍문사
- 성낙현, "형법총론", pp.735~ (2010), 동방문화사
- 손동권, "형법총론(제2개정판)", pp.667~ (2007), 율곡출판사
- 이재상, "형법총론(제6판)", pp.583~ (2009), 박영사
- 강도죄의 양형에 관한 연구, "이재상", 형사정책연구원, 53~54 (1992)
- 이형국, "형법총론(제4판)", pp.406~ (2007), 법문사
- 임웅, "형법총론(제3정판)", pp.629~ (2010), 법문사
- 박광민, "형법총론(제5판)", pp.685~ (2011), 삼영사
- 임상규, "책임범위이론의 재구성", 비교형사법연구, 2(2), pp.88~ (2001)
- 382, "“richtige” Strafe, In Recht und Staat, Heft 381", pp.1969, Henkel, Die
- Schöch, "Grunglage und Wirkung der Strafe, FS für Schaffstein", 255~273 (1975)
- Horn, "Wider die "doppelspurige", Straftöchenstafzumessung, FS für Schaaffein", 241~ (1975)
- Roxin, "Präventiom und Strafzumessung, in : Festschrift für Bruns", 190~ (1978)
- 김일수, "형법총론(제11판)", pp.744~745 (2007), 박영사
- 오영근, "바람직한 양형기준의 방식", 형사정책연구, 20(1), pp.347~370 (2009), 한국형사정책연구원
- 김현석, "양형기준의 작성원리 및 내용, 2009년 양형기준과 새로운 양형제도 법관연수 자료", 사법연수원, 29~ (2009)
- 이호중, "우리나라의 양형기준에 대한 비판적 분석", 형사법연구, 22(1), pp.241~272 (2010), 한국형사법학회
- 서봉규, "현행 양형기준의 문제점과 개선방안", 홍익법학, 11(2), pp.33~67 (2010), 법학연구소
- 승재현, "양형의 규범적 판단근거와 합리적인 양형기준방안에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2009
- 승재현, "우리나라 양형위원회 양형인자의 도출의 문제점 및 개선방향", 법학연구, 21(3), pp.109~134 (2010), 법학연구소
- 이주형, "최초 양형기준에 대한 비판적 고찰", 형사법의 신동향, 통권 : 21 (2009), 대검찰청
- 이현정, "양형위원회의 양형기준안에 대한 비판적 고찰", 성균관법학, 21(1), pp.359~388 (2009), 법학연구소
- 대법원, "양형기준 시행 이후 평균형량 상승", 사법정책실, ~ (2010)