국가보조금사기에 대한 형법적 대응방안
Possible Responses in Criminal Law to Government Subsidy Frauds
0
조회
0
다운로드
10
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Rendering Government subsidy is the administrative behavior of support by the Nation based on taxpayers’ money. As Government subsidy is financed by tax revenues from citizen, failure in successful management thereof would lead to leakage in public finance and cause burden to families in the nation. However, recently unqualified recipient cases are increasing due to loopholes in management of Government subsidy. This paper centered discussion on swindling behaviors among unqualified recipients. Swindling of subsidy may be subject to application of fraud crime punishment pursuant to Criminal Law, or punishment regulations by Act on the Budgeting and Management of Subsidies and other individual law. Judicial precedent applies fraud punishment pursuant to Criminal Law or subsidy fraud punishment regulation. However, modifications of related laws are required due to lack of clear guidelines. The critical issue here is whether fraud crime is applicable in swindling of subsidies case. In other word, this issue boils down to whether fraud crime pursuant to Criminal Law, Article 327 may be applicable, despite of the stipulations of punishing swindling behavior of Government subsidy pursuant to Act on the Budgeting and Management of Subsidies. If fraud crime pursuant to Criminal Law is not properly applicable to swindling behavior of subsidies, there is need to consider whether fraud crime should be inserted in Criminal Law, or whether the issue may be resolved by amendment of Act on the Budgeting and Management of Subsidies as well as application of individual law. Firstly, in consideration of illegal aspect of behavior and result as well as policy purpose of subsidy, it looks not desirable to apply fraud crime to unqualified recipient of subsidiary by fraud. Meanwhile, the view supporting insertion of subsidy fraud crime is not suitable either. The reason is new clause is not expected to bring deterrence effect differentiated with common people, and is expected to cause confusion in interpretation by complicated constitution requirements. And also insertion of subsidy fraud crime cannot be fundamental solution of the issue due to current negligence of subsidy embezzlement as one type of unqualified recipients. In conclusion, this paper presented amendment of Act on the Budgeting and Management of Subsidies and individual law as solution by de lege ferenda.
Abstract
Rendering Government subsidy is the administrative behavior of support by the Nation based on taxpayers’ money. As Government subsidy is financed by tax revenues from citizen, failure in successful management thereof would lead to leakage in public finance and cause burden to families in the nation. However, recently unqualified recipient cases are increasing due to loopholes in management of Government subsidy. This paper centered discussion on swindling behaviors among unqualified recipients. Swindling of subsidy may be subject to application of fraud crime punishment pursuant to Criminal Law, or punishment regulations by Act on the Budgeting and Management of Subsidies and other individual law. Judicial precedent applies fraud punishment pursuant to Criminal Law or subsidy fraud punishment regulation. However, modifications of related laws are required due to lack of clear guidelines. The critical issue here is whether fraud crime is applicable in swindling of subsidies case. In other word, this issue boils down to whether fraud crime pursuant to Criminal Law, Article 327 may be applicable, despite of the stipulations of punishing swindling behavior of Government subsidy pursuant to Act on the Budgeting and Management of Subsidies. If fraud crime pursuant to Criminal Law is not properly applicable to swindling behavior of subsidies, there is need to consider whether fraud crime should be inserted in Criminal Law, or whether the issue may be resolved by amendment of Act on the Budgeting and Management of Subsidies as well as application of individual law. Firstly, in consideration of illegal aspect of behavior and result as well as policy purpose of subsidy, it looks not desirable to apply fraud crime to unqualified recipient of subsidiary by fraud. Meanwhile, the view supporting insertion of subsidy fraud crime is not suitable either. The reason is new clause is not expected to bring deterrence effect differentiated with common people, and is expected to cause confusion in interpretation by complicated constitution requirements. And also insertion of subsidy fraud crime cannot be fundamental solution of the issue due to current negligence of subsidy embezzlement as one type of unqualified recipients. In conclusion, this paper presented amendment of Act on the Budgeting and Management of Subsidies and individual law as solution by de lege ferenda.
참고문헌 (14)
- 강구철, "강의행정법(상)" (1991), 학연사
- 김도창, "일반행정법론(하)" (1995), 청운사
- 박균성, "행정법강의" (2010), 博英社
- 변재옥, "행정법강의(Ⅰ)" (1990), 박영사
- 오재학, "지방교통시설 투자 관련 국고보조금 지원체계 개편 방안(연구총서)" (2007), 한국교통연구원
- 임 웅, "형법각론" (2011), 법문사
- 홍정선, "행정법원론(하)" (1996), 박영사
- 강구철, "보조금행정에 있어서 재량과 그 통제 원리에 관한 고찰", 법학논총, 9 (1997), 국민대학교 법학연구소
- 권오성, "정책수단으로서의 보조금 현황 및 연구경향", 행정논총, 47(1), pp.277~309 (2009), 한국행정연구소
- 김창규, "보조금교부행정의 법적 성질" (1995), 한양법학 제6편
- 류전철, "국가보조금 사취행위의 형법적 고찰", 비교형사법연구, 5(2-1), pp.24~632 (2003), 한국비교형사법학회
- 장선희, "보조금의 법적 근거와 유형 및 반환에 관한 연구", 공법학연구, 11(4), pp.81~109 (2010), 한국비교공법학회
- Schönke, "StGB, 27. Aufl" (2006), C.H.Beck
- Wessels, "31.Aufl" (2008), C.F.Müller
