본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

법조인소송

Proceedings against Lawyers

이재승
법학연구소 (The Institute of Legal Studies Konkuk University)|2019.10|일감법학 (Ilkam Law Review)|제44호|pp. 139-174|DOI 10.35148/ilsilr.2019..44.139

0

조회

0

다운로드

8

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

전쟁범죄crimes against humanitywar crimes뉘른베르크 군사재판소멘도사 법정법왜곡법조인소송사법살인인도에 반한죄정치재판distortion of law(Rechtsbeugung)judicial murderlawyer proceedingMendoza CourtNuremberg Military Tribunalpolitical trial

초록

저자는 법관의 법왜곡과 재판 남용에 대한 국제법정 및 외국의 국내법정의 판결을 개관하였다. 법관의 범죄를 국제법 및 비교법적 시각에서 검토하는 목적은 한국현대사에서 만연했던 유혈사법을 극복하는 데에 기여하기 위함이다. 지금까지 권력판결의 피해자중 상당수는 과거청산 국면에서 재심을 통해 무죄가 확정되었다. 하지만 이러한 재판에 관여했던 검사나 판사의 책임은 불문에 부쳐졌다. 국제법정에서도 사법살인이나 사법적 박해에대해 책임을 추궁한 사례는 매우 희귀하다. 제2차 세계대전 후 뉘른베르크에 설치된 미국군사재판소에서 다수의 나치법조인들이 전쟁범죄나 인도에 반한 죄로 처벌되었고, 소련점령구역에서도 동일한 유형의 재판이 이루어졌다. 수복 후 프랑스는 스트라스부르에서사법살인을 자행한 독일법조인을 전쟁범죄자로 처벌하였다. 라바울, 타이완, 상하이 등지에 설치된 연합국 군사재판소는 원주민 저항자나 미군포로들을 불공정한 절차로 처형한일본군 군법회의 관여자들을 전쟁범죄자로 처벌하였다. 국내법정에서 자국의 법조인에대한 처벌은 더욱 희귀하다. 사법부의 낡은 권력이 완전히 붕괴하는 경우에만 사법부의 범죄가 정화될 수 있기 때문이다. 점령체제의 종료후 1950-60년대에 독일의 하급심법원은 나치판사들을 살인죄나 법왜곡죄로 유죄를 선고하였으나 대법원은 특이한 법리로 면책시켰다. 독일에서 법왜곡죄의 실제적인 작동방식을 고려할 때 법왜곡죄가 과연 법관범죄를 통제하는 수단이 될 수 있는지 의문을 갖게 한다. 현재 아르헨티나는 강제실종에 관여했던 범죄자들을 대규모로 처벌하는 중이다. 2017년 아르헨티나 법원이 이러한 범죄를 공모하고은폐한 판사와 검사들에게 인도에 반한 죄로 종신형을 선고한 것은 매우 이채롭다. 결론적으로, 제주4.3군사재판, 한국전쟁 중 군사재판, 일련의 정치재판들은 앞서 언급한 판결에비추어볼 때 전쟁범죄나 인도에 반한 죄에 해당한다.

Abstract

This article aims at providing an overview of the rulings of international and foreign domestic courts on judicial murders or persecutions. The purpose of reviewing judicial crimes from the perspective of international or comparative law is to contribute to overcoming the bloody courts of Korea. Recently, a number of the victims of extrajudicial executions, mock trials and politically arbitrary trials committed in modern Korean history have been declared innocent by way of judicial retrial. However, none of the prosecutors or judges involved in such brutal trials were charged with responsibility. Only a few judicial crimes were prosecuted as international crimes by international courts. After World War II, lawyers who had applied or abused nazi-laws that persecuted Jews and foreigners were convicted of war crimes or crimes against humanity by the Nuremberg Military Tribunal. The French war crimes court also punished German lawyers who had committed judicial murders in Strasbourg. The Allied Military Tribunals, set up in Rabaul, Taiwan, Shanghai and elsewhere, punished members of the Japanese military courts who had executed indigenous insurgents or U.S. POWs in an unfair and arbitrary dossier trial. In general, punishments of judicial murders by domestic courts are even rarer, for judicial murderers could be prosecuted only if the old system of the judiciary would completely or fundamentally collapse. After the Allied occupation had been over, German lower courts tried to punish Nazi judges, but the Supreme Court always exonerated them by using bizarre logic. The fundamental question arises as to whether distortion of law(Rechtsbeugung) can function as means of control over judicial crimes. Argentina is in the process of cracking down on criminals who were involved in illegal kidnappings, illegal detentions, tortures or enforced disappearances under military dictatorship. In 2017, Mendoza court gave the life-long imprisonments to judges and prosecutors who had conspired, concealed or cooperated in these human rights violations for crimes against humanity. Finally, the author argued that Jeju 4.3 military tribunals, military tribunals during the Korean War, as well as a series of political tribunals under authoritarian regimes, constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity in light of the above-mentioned rulings.

참고문헌 (44)

  1. 이재승, "국가범죄" (2010), 앨피
  2. 헤로도투스, "역사" (2009), 도서출판 숲
  3. v. Brünneck, Alexander, "Ernst Fraenkel Gesammelte Schriften, Bd. 2(Nationalsozialismus und Widerstand)" (1999), Nomos
  4. Fletcher, George, "Rethinking Criminal Law" (2000), Oxford University Press
  5. Graver, Hans Petter, "Judges Against Justice: On Judges When the Rule of Law is Under Attack" (2015), Springer
  6. Henckaerts, Jean Marie, "Customary International Humanitarian Law, Vol. I-II" (2005), Cambridge University Press
  7. Kirchheimer, Otto, "Politische Justiz" (1993), Europäische Verlagsanstalt
  8. Meyer-Seitz, Christian, "Die Verfolgung von NS-Straftaten in der Sowjetischen Besatzungszone" (1998), Berlin Verlag
  9. Montagu, Basil, "The Works of FRANCIS BACON, Vol. 1" (1838), William Pickering
  10. Müller, Ingo, "Furchtbare Juristen: Die Unbewältigte Vergangenheit der Deutschen Justiz" (2014), DIAMAT
  11. Pereira, Anthony W., "Political (In)justice" (2005), University of Pittsburgh Press
  12. Perels, Joachim, "Das juristische Erbe des Dritten Reiches: Beschädigungen der demokratischen Rechtsordnung" (1999), Campus-Verlag
  13. Spendel, Günter, "Rechtsbeugung durch Rechtsprechung: Sechs strafrechtliche Studien" (1983), De Gruyter
  14. Steinweis, Alan E., "The Law in Nazi Germany: Ideology, Opportunism, and the Perversion of Justice" (2013), Berghahn
  15. Ueberschär, Gerd R., "Der Nationalsozialismus vor Gericht" (1999), Fischer Verlag
  16. 혼다 미노루, "프리츠 바우어 그리고 1945년 이후의 나치범죄의 극복", 민주법학, (48), pp.391~422 (2012), 민주주의법학연구회[DOI]
  17. 이재승, "법왜곡죄와 정치사법", 민주법학, (14), pp.184~210 (1998), 민주주의법학연구회
  18. Gruchmann, Lothar, "Ein Unbequemer Amtsrichter im Dritten Reich. Aus den Personalakten des Dr. Lothar Kreißig", Vierteljahrshefte für Zeitgeschichte Jahrg, 32, pp.463~490 (1984)
  19. Hacke, Gerald, "NS-Prozesse und Deutsche Öffentlichkeit, Besatzungszeit, frühe Bundesrepublik Deutschland und DDR", pp.167~188 (2011), Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht
  20. Lippman, Matthew, "The Prosecution of Josef Altstoetter et al.: Lawyers and Justice in the Third Reich", Dickinson Journal of International Law, 16, pp.343~433 (1998)
  21. Mignone, Emilio F., "Dictatorship on Trial: Prosecution of Human Rights Violations in Argentina", Yale Journal of International Law, 10, pp.118~150 (1984)
  22. Müller, Ingo, "Die Verwendung des Rechtsbeugungstatbestands zu politischen Zwecken", Kritische Justiz, 17(2), pp.119~141 (1984)
  23. Radbruch, Gustav, "Gesetzliches Unrecht und ůbergesetzliches Unrecht", Sůddeutsche Juristen-Zeitung, 1, pp.105~108 (1946)
  24. Radbruch, Gustav, "Des Reichsjustizministeriums Ruhm und Ende. ZUM NÜRNBERGER JURISTEN-PROZESS", Süddeutsche Juristen-Zeitung Jahrg, 3(2), pp.57~64 (1948)
  25. Rudolph, Hans-Joachim, "Systematish Kommentar zum StGB" (1996), Luchterhand
  26. Sikkink, Kathryn, "From Pariah State to Global Protagonist: Argentina and the Struggle for International Human Rights", Latin American Politics and Society, 50(1), pp.1~29 (2008)
  27. Solomon Jr., Peter H., "Courts and Judges in Authoritarian Regimes", World Politics, 60(1), pp.122~145 (2007)
  28. Wassermann, Rudolf, "Der Nationalsozialismus vor Gericht", pp.99~109 (1999), Fischer Verlag
  29. Werkentin, Falco, "Scheinjustiz in der frühen DDR. Aus den Regieheften der Waltheimer Prozesse des Jahres 1950", Kritische Justiz, 24, pp.333~350 (1950)
  30. "사법농단 재발방지, ‘법왜곡죄’가 답이다" (2018)[URL]
  31. "Verletztes Weltgewissen(2012-03-08)"[URL]
  32. "Chile to extradite Argentina ‘Dirty War’ judge Otilio Romano" (2013)[URL]
  33. Boister, Neil, "Documents on the Tokyo International Military Tribunal: Charter, Indictment and Judgements" (2008), Oxford University Press
  34. "CASE No. 13(Trial of Robert Wagner), United Nations War Crimes Commission, Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, Vol. III", 23~55 (1948)
  35. "CASE No. 25(TRIAL OF LIEUTENANT-GENERAL SHIGERU SAWADA AND THREE OTHERS .UNITED STATES MILITARY COMMISSION, SHANGHAI, 27TH FEBRUARY, 1946-15TH APRIL, 1946), United Nations War Crimes Commission, Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, Vol. V", 1~24 (1948)
  36. "CASE No. 26(TRIAL OF SERGEANT-MAJOR SHIGERU OHASHI AND SIX OTHERS, AUSTRALIAN MILITARY COURT, RABAUL, 20TH-23RD MARCH, 1946), United Nations War Crimes Commission, Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, Vol. V", 25~31 (1948)
  37. "CASE No. 27(TRIAL OF CAPTAIN EITARO SHINOHARA AND TWO OTHERS, AUSTRALIAN MILITARY COURT, RABAUL, 30TH MARCH-1sT APRIL, 1946), United Nations War Crimes Commission, Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, Vol. V", 32~36 (1948)
  38. "CASE No. 32(TRIAL OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL HARUKEI ISAYAMA AND SEVEN OTHERS, UNITED STATES MILITARY COMMISSION, SHANGHAI, 1ST-25TH JULY, 1946), United Nations War Crimes Commission, Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, Vol. V", 60~65 (1948)
  39. "CASE No. 33(TRIAL OF GENERAL TANAKA HISAKASU AND FIVE OTHERS, UNITED STATES MILITARY COMMISSION, SHANGHAI, 13TH AUGUST-3RD SEPTEMBER, 1946), United Nations War Crimes Commission, Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, Vol. V", 66~81 (1948)
  40. "CASE No. 86(TRIAL OF HANS PAUL HELMUTH LATZA AND TWO OTHERS, BY THE EIDSIVATING LAGMANNSRETT (COURT OF APPEAL) AND THE SUPREME COURT OF NORWAY, 18TH FEBRUARY, 1947-3RP DECEMBER, 1948), United Nations War Crimes Commission, Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, Vol. XIV", 49~85 (1949)
  41. "Justiz ohne Gewissen – Justiz “nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen" (2007)[URL]
  42. "IACHR Welcomes Historic Decision of the Federal Oral Court of Mendoza, Argentina(2017-8-29)"[URL]
  43. "Analysis: Judges as Perpetrators of War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity" (2017)[URL]
  44. United States Government Printing Offices, "TRIALS OF WAR CRIMINALS BEFORE THE NUERNBERG MILITARY TRIBUNALS, Vol. III", ~ (1951)

관련 논문AI추천

점령법원의 유죄판결에 대한 재심이재승민주주의법학연구회 · 민주법학2023 · 제81호제2차 세계대전 이후 극동지역 전시범죄 재판 개관유하영사회과학연구원 부설 동북아연구소 · 동북아연구2019 · 제34권 제1호국제 형사재판과 한국 형사재판의 비교법적 고찰권오곤대한변호사협회 · 인권과 정의2006 · 제359호법은 국가폭력에 대한 사법정의를 구현할 수 있는가 : 제주 4·3 재심청구 2차 재판을 중심으로송혜림국학연구원 · 동방학지2022 · 제201호군사법원 폐지를 위한 사례연구박병욱, 이계수민주주의법학연구회 · 민주법학2016 · 제60호과거사 사건 재심에서 고려해야 할 사항 ― 여순사건 재심을 중심으로 ―최관호민주주의법학연구회 · 민주법학2020 · 제74호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (8건)

부패방지를 위한 청탁금지법의 역할과 문제점송기춘pp. 3-25어느 법 연구자의 도시 관찰 : 베를린에서 바라본 도시의 법과 정치이계수pp. 27-80북향민의 삶의 질 향상을 위한 법적 고찰 -북향민의 국가보안법 저촉사례를 중심으로-전수미pp. 81-102직권남용죄의 성립범위 -법관⋅검사의 형사책임 논의를 위한 단초-오병두pp. 105-137간접규제로 바라본 온라인게임 결제한도 제한 -Lessig와 Sunstein의 간접규제사고를 기초로 하여-서종희pp. 177-206
원문 보기