동북아시아 3국의 사형제도에 대한 비교 고찰 -정치·사회·문화적 측면을 중심으로-

Abstract

If we understand that the penalty system is to protect lives from the life threatening behaviors, the existence of death sentence is an incompatible discrepancy and there cannot be any other side products except functional and symbolical meanings. Nowadays, human rights are highly regarded so as that we can control the thought to resolve the issue of crimes through death penalty. When considering that the high level of the respect for the human rights is achieved through the long historical fights, the extension of human rights through the removal of death penalty is the issue that should reflect the common efforts of the human beings and the long fighting history. Under such provisions, we reviewed the status and the problems of the death penalty in three countries in Northeast Asia and the social and political situations of individual countries. The common reasons why the three countries wanted to have the death penalty in their legal systems were superficially the feelings of citizens, legal confidence and the theory of social status.  However, when we looked into the issue more deeply, they wanted to have it to maintain the political authority and the order of the system.  We cannot deny the trend even at present. If we look into the death penalty in Korea, China and Japan, they seem to be potentially reserved, mass public execution and symbolical existence respectively. The public opinion on the death penalty in those three countries is strict enforcement. In other words, the issue of the existence or eradication of death penalty does not depend on the public feelings or legal confidence or cultural development of the nation but on the political decision of the nation. When we look back the past history, Northeast Asian nations enforced the death penalty when they wanted to arrange the government system or when they did not have authenticity. When they have stable political situations and established the nation firmly, they normally mitigated or suspended the execution of death sentence. Therefore, it is confirmed again that the existence or the termination of the death penalty needs political decision. This perception is very true when we consider the nations that have already remove the death sentence from their penalty system. Conclusively, we need to discuss the abolition of death penalty and avoid the argument regarding the public feelings and the level of the cultural development to address Being too early. If we address that we still need death penalty based on those assertions, we may have to accept that our culture is still primitive, non-enlightened and closed. Additionally we need to change the tactics to approach the issue of death penalty. We need to classify the discussions regarding the death penalty as strategy and tactics, review the strategic dimension which has mainly been studied and find realistic solutions in the dimension of tactics. The formatted discussion regarding the death penalty is frequently mentioned as the cause of stagnation of the controversy. It is hoped that this study would stimulate researchers to find various methodologies to abolish the death penalty from the discipline system.