징벌적 추징의 문제점과 개선방향
The Legal Problem and Soiution of Disciplinary Confiscation
0
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This dissertation studies about disciplinary confiscation. Disciplinary confiscation is not regulated in criminal law and special laws. The confiscation among many other punishments is mainly purposed for depriving profit so that Supreme Court confiscate from those who don’t have profit but, the disciplinary confiscation regulated in special laws including the Customs Law can be characterized as a punishment so that Supreme Court imposes collective responsibility to involved all criminals. However, that Supreme Court’s enactment of the Customs Law and other laws on disciplinary confiscation is censured by the view of violation of The principle of legality and The principle of responsibility. Because Supreme Court’s ground for acknowledging disciplinary confiscation is not clear and, imposes collective responsibility among criminals on the basis of the equivocal ground. To confirm the validity of the existing criticism on confiscation this dissertation first confirm the meaning of punishment and the legal character of disciplinary confiscation and shows disciplinary is similar to punishment. Next, it reveals Supreme Court’s acknowledgement of enactment of the Customs Law and other laws on disciplinary confiscation is incompatible with principle of legality after the close examination on Supreme Court’s ground of applying disciplinary confiscation. Finally, it defines Supreme Court’s imposing collective responsibility to all criminals is also violation of The principle of responsibility. Additionlly, this study concludes that the validity lies in the suggestion that Supreme Court should abolish the theory of disciplinary confiscation.
Abstract
This dissertation studies about disciplinary confiscation. Disciplinary confiscation is not regulated in criminal law and special laws. The confiscation among many other punishments is mainly purposed for depriving profit so that Supreme Court confiscate from those who don’t have profit but, the disciplinary confiscation regulated in special laws including the Customs Law can be characterized as a punishment so that Supreme Court imposes collective responsibility to involved all criminals. However, that Supreme Court’s enactment of the Customs Law and other laws on disciplinary confiscation is censured by the view of violation of The principle of legality and The principle of responsibility. Because Supreme Court’s ground for acknowledging disciplinary confiscation is not clear and, imposes collective responsibility among criminals on the basis of the equivocal ground. To confirm the validity of the existing criticism on confiscation this dissertation first confirm the meaning of punishment and the legal character of disciplinary confiscation and shows disciplinary is similar to punishment. Next, it reveals Supreme Court’s acknowledgement of enactment of the Customs Law and other laws on disciplinary confiscation is incompatible with principle of legality after the close examination on Supreme Court’s ground of applying disciplinary confiscation. Finally, it defines Supreme Court’s imposing collective responsibility to all criminals is also violation of The principle of responsibility. Additionlly, this study concludes that the validity lies in the suggestion that Supreme Court should abolish the theory of disciplinary confiscation.
참고문헌 (21)
- 김성돈, "형법총론" (2009), 성균관대학교 출판부
- 박상기, "형법총론(제8판)" (2009), 박영사
- 오영근, "형법총론 제2판" (2009), 전영사
- 정성근, "형법총론" (2008), 삼지원
- 김대휘, "징벌적추징에 관하여", 형사판례연구, 8 (2000)
- 김형석, "마약류관리에 관한 법률의 추징에 대한 몇 가지 고찰", 재판실무연구, 3 (2006), 수원지방법원
- 변종필, "대법원의 형법해석론에 대한 비판적 고찰", 비교형사법연구, 7(1), pp.1~28 (2005), 한국비교형사법학회
- 서보학, "공범간에 취득한 이익이 다른 경우의 추징방법", 형사판례연구, 8 (2000), 형사판례연구회
- 서종혁, "몰수⋅추징에 관한 몇가지 문제", 공군법률자료, ~ (2000)
- 신영호, "몰수의 법적 성격에 대하여-징벌적 몰수⋅추징의 개념사용을 보며", 부산대학교 법학연구, 41(1) (2000)
- 이승현, "특별법상 추징의 법적 성격", 형사판례연구, 18, pp.640~675 (2010), 한국형사판례연구회
- 이영한, "징벌적 개념의 몰수⋅추징에 대한 몇가지 문제", 재판실무연구 (2004), 광주고등법원
- 우영기, "공동연대추징과 그 집행", 법조, (537) (2001)
- 원혜욱, "범죄소득의 추징", 비교형사법연구, 7(2(2)), pp.203~226 (2005), 한국비교형사법학회
- 전주혜, "변호사법 위반죄에 있어서 추징 범위", 형사판례연구, (4) (1996)
- 황일호, "징벌적 몰수·추징의 법적 문제", 중앙법학, 10(2), pp.101~131 (2008), 중앙법학회
- 高山佳奈子, "犯罪收益の剝奪", 法学論叢, 15(4) (2004), 京都大学法学会
- 丸山雅夫, "財産的制裁としての沒收⋅追徵-從來の沒收(追徵)制度とい わゆる麻藥特例法-", 南山法學, 17(1) (1993)
- 大谷正治, "關稅法おける沒收⋅追徵を科すべき犯人の範囲", 判例タイムズ, 30(26) (1996)
- 山本輝之, "刑法における沒收⋅追徵, In 現代社會における沒收⋅追徵" (1996), 信産出版社
- S⋅H⋅E, "最高裁關稅法の沒收に 代わる追徵の性質についての見解 を明示", 時の法令, (511) (1964)