형법 제10조 제3항의 가벌성에 관한 재조명
Shed new lights about punishment 3 of article 10 of the Criminal law
0
조회
0
다운로드
2
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The point of discussion about "Actio libera in causa" focused on what evidence of punishments actuced from alienation on the principle of means. Older theory has the advantages of the theory but the structural characteristics of "the Actio libera in causa" may be overlooked. Actio libera in causa has the features of two structured activities. Therefore, the previous opinion actuced from an criterion of punishment with only a deed may overlook the structural features of "Actio libera in causa". Therefore,by the most recent opinion we can find the evidence of punishment, better reflecting the structural features of Actio libera in causa on the relevance of both acts. However, the mean just as both act is integrally connected, it can be punished requires more specific description. Therefore, it will need to review once again if both acts in any relationship is subject to penalty. In this thesis, regarding both deeds are related with a recognition of the criminal acts, I presented more definite descriptions about previous opinions and a penalty basis of the Actio libera in causa.
Abstract
The point of discussion about "Actio libera in causa" focused on what evidence of punishments actuced from alienation on the principle of means. Older theory has the advantages of the theory but the structural characteristics of "the Actio libera in causa" may be overlooked. Actio libera in causa has the features of two structured activities. Therefore, the previous opinion actuced from an criterion of punishment with only a deed may overlook the structural features of "Actio libera in causa". Therefore,by the most recent opinion we can find the evidence of punishment, better reflecting the structural features of Actio libera in causa on the relevance of both acts. However, the mean just as both act is integrally connected, it can be punished requires more specific description. Therefore, it will need to review once again if both acts in any relationship is subject to penalty. In this thesis, regarding both deeds are related with a recognition of the criminal acts, I presented more definite descriptions about previous opinions and a penalty basis of the Actio libera in causa.
참고문헌 (40)
- 김일수, "한국형법2" (1996), 박영사
- 김일수, "형법총론" (2006), 박영사
- 정성근, "형법총론" (2005), 삼지원
- 정성근, "형법총론" (2001), 삼지원
- 박상기, "형법총론" (2009), 박영사
- 남흥우, "형법총론" (1983), 박영사
- 백남억, "형법총론" (1963), 법문사
- 이건호, "형법총론" (1987), 한국사법행정학회
- 황산덕, "형법총론" (1991), 방문사
- 이재상, "형법총론" (2008), 박영사
- 유기천, "개정형법학(형법총론)" (1984), 일조각
- 정영일, "형법총론" (2005), 박영사
- 심재무, "형법총론과 연습강의" (2006), 신지서원
- 임웅, "형법총론" (2007), 법문사
- 안동준, "형법총론" (1998), 학현사
- 최우찬, "자유로운 원인에 의한 행위", 형사법연구, 9 (1996), 한국형사법학회
- 한정환, "형법 제10조 제3항과 원인에 있어서 자유로운 행위", 형사법연구, (25), pp.139~162 (2006), 한국형사법학회
- 김종원, "소위 원인에 있어서 자유로운 행위에 관한 소고" (2001), 오선주교수정년기념논문집
- 오상원, "원인에 있어서의 자유로운 행위의 가벌적 근거", 비교형사법연구, 5(1), pp.3~78 (2003), 한국비교형사법학회
- 형법 제10조 3항의 적용범위, "박현준", 한국사법행정학회, ~ (2002)
- 원인에 있어서 자유로운 행위, 특히 원인행위시 이중의 고의가 없는 자가고의범을 실행한 경우의 처리문제, "손동권", 고시연구, ~ (2000)
- 자유로운 원인행위로 인한 완전책임의 범죄성립, "손동권", 판례월보사, ~ (1997)
- 김성룡, "현행 형법 체계에 기초한 제10조제3항에 대한 해석론의 대상과 쟁점", 비교형사법연구, 11(1), pp.163~182 (2009), 한국비교형사법학회
- 과실의 원인에 있어서 자유로운 행위, "조상제", 형사판례연구(4), ~ (1999)
- Horn, "Actio libera in causa－eine notwendige", eine zulässige Rechtsfigur, GA1969, ~ (1969)
- Päffge, "Actio libera in causa und §323 a StGB, ZStW97", ~ (1985)
- Thomas Rӧnnau, "Dogmatisch-konstruktive Losungsmodelle zur actio libera incausa" (1997), JA
- Salger, "Die actio libera in causa in causa-eine rechtswidrigeRechtsfigur" (1993), NStZ
- Hruschka, "Die actio libera in causa bei Vorsatztaten und beiFahrlässigkeitstaten" (1997), JZ
- Gropp, "Strafrecht AT, 3.Aufl", ~ (2005)
- 前野育三, "原因において自由な行為", 静岡大学法経研究, 17(2) (1968)
- 浅田和茂, "原因において自由な行為ー全面否定説の展開ー", 現代刑事法, (20) (2000)
- 平川宗信, "原因において自由な行為－否定説と立法的解決の提案－", 現代刑事法, (20) (2000), 現代法律出版
- "대법 1992.7.28 선고 92도999", ~ (1992)
- "RGSt 73, 177", ~
- "BGHSt 17, 259", ~
- "BGHSt 21, 381", ~
- "大阪地判昭51. 3. 4", ~
- "名古屋高判昭31. 4. 19", ~
- "最大判昭 26. 1. 17", ~