교통사범의 민형사상 책임에 관한 연구

Abstract

When a traffic accident occurs, two trials can take place as criminal case and civil case. Thus, even though they relate to the same incident, criminal court may find it not guilty and civil court may recognize the liability of reparation or criminal court may find it guilty and civil court may deny the liability of reparation. From the legal point of view, considering Licensed Administrative Agent Act, which divides criminal case and civil case in principle, this may seem natural. Still, from the victim’s viewpoint, it needs to be reviewed to see if the conflicting trial result is acceptable. As can be seen from Basic Act on Crime Victims, the victims naturally get attention and the public opinion has the tendency of sympathizing with the victims. In this sense, not only for the victims themselves but for the general public, the gap between the result of criminal trial and that of civil trial is a conundrum and if it is regarded natural without clear judgment, it may affect people’s trust in the judicial system. Thus, in order to ease up doubts of people toward jurisdiction, the contrasting results between criminal trial and civil trial should be analyzed and it should be decided when to accept such differences and when not to. If the principle of ‘limited application of criminal punishment’ is respected, there should be more careful approaches in cases where criminal liability is recognized but civil liability is denied. Moreover, to make jurisdiction more trustworthy for the public, the cases should be avoided where criminal liability is recognized while civil liability is denied, and in criminal courts, criminal punishment should be applied sparingly.