불법유출 문화유산에 대한 형사법적 보호
Protected by Criminal Law for the Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Heritage
1
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In the background of that the several countries in the world recognized the importance of their own cultural heritage and set the management and protection as one of the major challenges of the national policy, a variety of intents and purposes must be existed but generally, it means that the relative country entered the stable welfare-type economy structural phase to show culturism and to determine quality of life out of the incomplete survival-type structural. In addition, in the side of the relative country ensuring differentiated identity in the international community, the fact that the cultural heritage performs some roles and features over the symbolism was recognized. By the way, the protection policy of cultural heritage in our country is set to pursue the illegal outflow cultural heritage charge back of illegal outflow cultural heritage internationally, and the prevention and effective retention about damage stolen domestically by duality way, and the related issues are being examined and the measures for the realization are planned. But the legal systems which can respond effectively to the cultural property crime has been consisting as improvises depending on necessity, so it is incomplete and maintenance is not proper, and the charge back problem of overseas illegal outflow of cultural heritage that the conditions to participate in the exact situation and international coordination and cooperation are not prepared. Therefore, the causes and characteristics and usage of cultural property crime should be checked for being appropriate to the realistic request, and rushing to sign up related international norms, and the problems of domestic-related norms should be diagnosed objectively, so the unilateral regulatory should be enhanced and the appropriate response measures about the parts that improvements are necessary should be followed.
Abstract
In the background of that the several countries in the world recognized the importance of their own cultural heritage and set the management and protection as one of the major challenges of the national policy, a variety of intents and purposes must be existed but generally, it means that the relative country entered the stable welfare-type economy structural phase to show culturism and to determine quality of life out of the incomplete survival-type structural. In addition, in the side of the relative country ensuring differentiated identity in the international community, the fact that the cultural heritage performs some roles and features over the symbolism was recognized. By the way, the protection policy of cultural heritage in our country is set to pursue the illegal outflow cultural heritage charge back of illegal outflow cultural heritage internationally, and the prevention and effective retention about damage stolen domestically by duality way, and the related issues are being examined and the measures for the realization are planned. But the legal systems which can respond effectively to the cultural property crime has been consisting as improvises depending on necessity, so it is incomplete and maintenance is not proper, and the charge back problem of overseas illegal outflow of cultural heritage that the conditions to participate in the exact situation and international coordination and cooperation are not prepared. Therefore, the causes and characteristics and usage of cultural property crime should be checked for being appropriate to the realistic request, and rushing to sign up related international norms, and the problems of domestic-related norms should be diagnosed objectively, so the unilateral regulatory should be enhanced and the appropriate response measures about the parts that improvements are necessary should be followed.
참고문헌 (35)
- "헌법재판소 2000. 6. 29. 선고 98헌바67결정", ~
- "헌법재판소 2007. 7. 26. 선고 2003헌마377결정", ~
- "미래세대에 대한 현재세대의 의무에 관한 선언(Declaration on Responsibilities of Present Generations towards Future Generations)", ~
- 정종섭, "國家의 文化遺産保護義務와 古都의 保存", 서울대학교 법학, 44(3), pp.28~66 (2003), 법학연구소
- Abdulqawi Yusuf, "Unesco, Standard-setting in UNESCO: Conventions, recommendations, declarations, and charters adopted by UNESCO (1948-2006)", pp.703~706 (2007), BRILL
- 최대권, "文化財保護와 憲法", 서울대학교 법학, 44(3), pp.1~27 (2003), 법학연구소
- 박기석, "문화재범죄의 실태와 대책", 형사정책, 16(2), pp.37~60 (2004), 한국형사정책학회
- 문화재범죄의 효율적 규제방안에 관한 연구, "신의기", 한국형사정책연구원, 66~ (2001)
- "2010년도 문화체육관광방송통신위원회 국정감사요구자료", 937~942
- "2009년도 문화체육관광방송통신위원회 국정감사요구자료(Ⅱ)", 문화재청, 271~ (2009)
- "2010년 범죄백서", pp.184~ (2011), 법무연수원
- Irini A. Stamatoudi, "Cultural Property Law and Restitution: A Commentary to International Conventions and European Union Law", pp.31~ (2011), Edward Elgar Publishing
- 도난·불법반출 문화재에 관한 법리적 연구, "서현제", 한국법제연구원, 35~ (2007)
- Jeanette Greenfield, "The return of cultural treasures", pp.4~6 (2007), Cambridge University Press
- Robert R. Janes, "Museums in a troubled world: renewal, irrelevance or collapse?", pp.205~ (2009), Taylor & Francis
- "わが国が未批准の国際条約一覧", 国立国会図書館調査反び入立法考査局, 51~ (2009)
- 日韓間の文化財引渡し経緯と日韓図書協定の成立-国会論議を中心に振り返る, "中內康夫", 日本参議院 事務局, 14~, pp.立法と調査 第319号 (2011)
- "대법원 1984. 5. 29. 선고 83도2680판결", ~
- Miles, Margaret M, "Art as Plunder: The Ancient Origins of Debate About Cultural Property", pp.320~ (2008), Cambridge University Press
- Bruce Oswald, "Helen Durham, Adrian Bates, Documents on the law of UN peace operations", pp.261~ (2010), Oxford University Press
- 정영목, "문화재에 관한 한일 간의 갈등 ―그 역사와 인식의 차이 ―", 서울대학교 법학, 44(3), pp.67~90 (2003), 법학연구소
- "대법원 2005. 2. 18. 선고 2003도4158판결", ~
- "헌법재판소 2000. 6. 29. 선고 98헌바67 전원재판부 결정", 판례집, 12(1), pp.801~
- "헌법재판소 2007. 7. 26. 선고 2003헌마377 전원재판부 결정", 판례집, 19(2), pp.90~
- 헌법재판소, "헌법재판소 2009. 7. 30. 선고 2007헌마879 전원합의부 결정", 판례집, 21(2), pp.348~ (2009)
- "대법원 1987. 10. 13. 선고 87도538판결", ~
- 성왕, "사법상의 보유권한을 불문한 도굴문화재 보유·보관 행위의 처벌과 재산권의 제한, In 헌법재판소결정해설집" (2007), 헌법재판소
- , 第177回 日本 国会参議院外交防衛委員会 会議録, 통권 : 10, pp.8~ (2011)
- "동아일보 1990년 4월 7일자 18면 기사", ~ (1990)
- "매일경제신문 1996년 12월 30일 39면 기사", ~ (1996)
- 이근관, "동아시아지역의 문화재 보호 및 불법거래방지에 관한 법적 고찰", 서울대학교 법학, 44(3), pp.91~134 (2003), 법학연구소
- "서울신문 2004년 10월 14일자", ~ (2004)
- "헤럴드경제신문, 2011년 8월 29일자 기사", ~ (2011)
- 최순용, "문화재보호법의 형사적 문제", 법조, (549), pp.56~ (2002)