영국의 범죄수익 민사환수제도에 관한 연구: 범죄수익규제법 중심으로
Learning from the UK’s Civil Recovery in Proceeds of Crime Act 2002
0
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Korea’s legal system has only a criminal forfeiture system that serves to recover the proceeds of crime. The criminal forfeiture requires a criminal trial and conviction, which means that the government must first establish guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt” or such that the judge is “intimately convinced”. However, the death of Yoo Byung-eun, who was responsible for the sinking of the Sewol ferry, brought an end to criminal proceedings, including criminal forfeiture. This issue can provide a strong impetus for the imposition of a civil forfeiture system in Korea, sometime in the near future, particularly in order to compensate for the disadvantages of a criminal forfeiture system. In contrast, a civil forfeiture system is a separate action from any criminal proceedings, and requires a “balance of probabilities” standard of proof (a lower burden of proof). Most importantly, civil forfeiture can be employed to forfeiture proceeds of crime, even after the defendant has died, fled the jurisdiction or is immune from prosecution. Therefore, if Korea’s legal system had a civil forfeiture, it could be argued that the late Yoo’s assets could still be confiscated. The UK is the birthplace of a civil forfeiture system, and in the UK, civil forfeiture proceedings are initiated in the name of “Civil Recovery” under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. Neither cash proceedings nor proceedings for a civil recovery order require a prior criminal conviction in the UK. Under these circumstances, the research attempts to explore the UK’s civil recovery system by using a descriptive approach, and finally provides policy implications for Korea’s potential civil forfeiture, particularly from the perspective of a comparative study.
Abstract
Korea’s legal system has only a criminal forfeiture system that serves to recover the proceeds of crime. The criminal forfeiture requires a criminal trial and conviction, which means that the government must first establish guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt” or such that the judge is “intimately convinced”. However, the death of Yoo Byung-eun, who was responsible for the sinking of the Sewol ferry, brought an end to criminal proceedings, including criminal forfeiture. This issue can provide a strong impetus for the imposition of a civil forfeiture system in Korea, sometime in the near future, particularly in order to compensate for the disadvantages of a criminal forfeiture system. In contrast, a civil forfeiture system is a separate action from any criminal proceedings, and requires a “balance of probabilities” standard of proof (a lower burden of proof). Most importantly, civil forfeiture can be employed to forfeiture proceeds of crime, even after the defendant has died, fled the jurisdiction or is immune from prosecution. Therefore, if Korea’s legal system had a civil forfeiture, it could be argued that the late Yoo’s assets could still be confiscated. The UK is the birthplace of a civil forfeiture system, and in the UK, civil forfeiture proceedings are initiated in the name of “Civil Recovery” under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. Neither cash proceedings nor proceedings for a civil recovery order require a prior criminal conviction in the UK. Under these circumstances, the research attempts to explore the UK’s civil recovery system by using a descriptive approach, and finally provides policy implications for Korea’s potential civil forfeiture, particularly from the perspective of a comparative study.
참고문헌 (26)
- 강우예, "범죄수익 민사 몰수제도에 관한 연구" (2009), 대검찰청
- 김한균, "영국의 몰수, 추징 법제도의 개혁과 형사정책", 형사정책연구소식, (97) (2006), 형사정책연구원
- 박미숙, "독립제재로서의 범죄수익몰수제도" (2003), 형사정책연구원
- 이병기, "약물범죄수익몰수제도에 관한 연구" (1993), 형사정책연구원
- Greenberg, T. S., "Stolen Asset Recovery : A Good Practices Guide for Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture" (2009), World Bank
- FATF, "International Standards on Combating Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism & Proliferation : The FATF 40 Recommendations" (2012), FATF
- McCLEAN, D, "International Co-Operation in Civil and Criminal Matters" (2012), Oxford University Press
- 12, "Serious Organised Crime Agency Annual Report and Accounts 2011", pp.2012, SOCA
- 13, "Serious Organised Crime Agency Annual Report and Accounts 2012", pp.2013, SOCA
- 강철하, "범죄수익박탈제도의 문제점 및 개선방향", 법조, 60(10), pp.318~357 (2011), 법조협회
- 김희균, "민사몰수제도의 도입에 관한 연구", 피해자학연구, 19(1), pp.57~80 (2011), 한국피해자학회
- 김학경, "불법사행산업 근절을 위한 영국 사행행위규제위원회에 관한 연구- 조직 거버넌스 및 권한 중심으로 -", 경찰법연구, 11(2), pp.217~247 (2013), 한국경찰법학회
- 김종호, "재산명시제도의 실효성 확보방안: 영국의 재산동결명령과 재산개시명령을 중심으로", 경희법학, 47(4), pp.511~556 (2012), 법학연구소
- 도중진, "범죄수익 몰수자산기금 도입방안", 형사정책연구, 18(3), pp.1435~1470 (2007), 한국형사정책연구원
- 박미숙, "몰수특례법상 불법재산의 추정과 법치국가적 한계", 형사정책연구, 15(1), pp.155~190 (2004), 한국형사정책연구원
- 이무선, "범죄수익 몰수에 대한 형사법적 검토", 경희법학, 49(1), pp.233~264 (2014), 법학연구소
- 정웅석, "추징금미납의 실효성 확보방안", 법조, 56(9), pp.239~274 (2007), 법조협회
- 정웅석, "영국 자산회수국의 조직과 역할에 관한 연구", 법학연구, 18(2), pp.95~114 (2008), 법학연구원
- 최종무, "미국의 범죄수익환수기법과 국내 도입가능성", 형사법의 신동향, (25)통권 : 25, pp.46~103 (2010), 대검찰청
- Snider, W. J., "The Forfeiture (Confiscation) of the Proceeds of Drug Trafficking by the United States Government", 형사정책연구, 4(3), pp.161~196 (1993)
- Campbell, L., "The Recovery of Criminal Assets in New Zealand, Ireland and England: Fighting Organised and Crime in the Civil Realm", Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 41(1), pp.15~36 (2010)
- Garretson, H. J., "Federal Criminal Forfeiture: A Royal Pain in the Assets", Review of Law and Social Justice, 18(1), pp.45~77 (2008)
- Kennedy, A., "Civil Recovery Proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002: The Experience So Far", Journal of Money Laundering Control, 9(3), pp.245~264 (2006)
- "유씨 법정 못세워 재산 몰수 ‘험로’"[URL]
- "Civil Recovery Claims Under the PCA" (2003)[URL]
- "유병언법' 책임재산 환수 가능하나?"[URL]