공원범죄의 피해방지를 위한 합리적인 방안

박찬걸(Park, Chan-Keol) 한국피해자학회 2012 被害者學硏究 Vol.20 No.2

Before constructing parks, it's necessary to formulate plans in the direction of preventing crimes in advance, and follow-up management must be done after constructing the parks completely. If citizens are reluctant to use the parks because public safety is not guaranteed, the reason for being disappears. If the parks do not protect citizens from crimes, it would rather not exist than do harm to them. Rather, it is good policy. In this respect, the current system must be improved, which has no manual for crime prevention being confined to policy of increasing the number of parks. Through the government's expressing its firm will to secure public safety of parks by enacting clear provisions so that the original good will is not distorted to make resting places for citizens, a recognition that illegal acts which make others anxious are punished necessarily must be instilled into park users while taking a sound rest is protected thoroughly. In addition, the police should do the patrols actively in order to prevent crimes in the parks and try to increase street lamps and security CCTV installation in collaboration with the agencies concerned including gu offices. However, it can be said the most important thing to prevent damage of the crimes in the parks is the very civic consciousness. We should keep it in mind that along with continuous efforts by the police and public organizations, a sense of ownership that 'I am the owner of the park' and mature civic consciousness to ‘care for the park like my house’ will make the parks safe without crimes.

의료소년원의 운영현황과 발전방안

박찬걸(Park, Chan-Geol) 한국형사정책학회 2017 刑事政策 Vol.29 No.3

The main purpose of properly rendering individual treatment to antisocial juveniles might be to strengthen protection of human rights for protected juveniles and enhance the effectiveness of corrective education. For this, the revised Juvenile Act in 2007 added juvenile medical facilities besides hospitals and sanitariums as the institutions for the Subparagraph 7 Disposition and revised Protected Juvenile Act in 2013 made clear the legal grounds for treatment of juveniles requiring medical, rehabilitation education. These came to provide both legality and justification for practices which used to have either ambiguous or no grounds in the existing law. But as a matter of fact, there are still so many legal or institutional shortcomings in our society s path towards complete sorting out problems emerged while operating our country s medical youth training centers. Having that issue in mind, this article firstly looked at the current state of regulations and organizations related with medical youth training centers. And then the study moved to examine the current state of operation focused on foster care period, the state of foster completion, the state of transfer of juveniles requiring medical/rehabilitation treatment, the state by the handicap type, the state by age and gender. The study then examined the current state of actual education, focused on education of newcomers, classification of the target of education. process and organization of concentrated education. Following the solid understanding of the current operational state of medical youth training centers as such, the study sought to find futuristic methods for their development. For these, the study suggested several solutions by grouping; deletion of regulations related with treatment of hospitals and sanitariums , sorting out overcrowded accommodation, necessity for installing independent medical youth training centers, separate accommodation by the target and individual treatment. And the study concluded the discussion.

위증죄에 관한 실체법적 및 절차법적 쟁점

박찬걸(Park, Chankeol) 대검찰청 2015 형사법의 신동향 Vol.0 No.49

형사법에 있어서 실체법의 성격과 절차법의 성격은 항상 상호의존적인 관계를 형성하고 있는데, 이러한 특징을 잘 보여주고 있는 범죄가 위증죄라고 할 수 있다. 위증죄는 선서에 의하여 담보된 증인 진술의 정확성을 확보함으로써 법원 또는 심판기관의 실체적 진실 발견을 위한 심리를 해하여 정당한 판단이 위태롭게 되는 것을 방지하는 기능을 수행하는데, 형법 제152조 제1항에서는 ‘법률에 의하여 선서한 증인이 허위의 진술을 한 때에는 5년 이하의 징역 또는 1천만원 이하의 벌금에 처한다.’라고 하여 위증죄를 규정하고 있다. 기존의 위증죄에 관한 논의가 주로 객관적 구성요건요소인 ‘허위의 진술’이 과연 무엇을 의미하는지와 관련하여 보호법익의 관점, 기수시기의 문제등과 결부되어 학설의 대립 및 판례의 입장에 대한 검토 등을 하는 것이 주류를 이루고 있었던 것이 사실이었다. 이는 기존의 위증죄에 대한 논의가 대체적으로 실체법적인 접근방법을 주로 이용하고 있었다는 점을 보여주는 것이었는데, 최근에 들어 이러한 논의방식을 탈피하여 보다 절차법적인 접근방법에서 위증죄를 다루려는 시도가 급증하는 추세에 있다고 평가할 수 있다. 이와 같은 변화의 주된 원인은 최근 선고된 위증죄와 관련된 대법원 판결의 흐름에서 쉽게 찾아 볼 수 있는데, 이러한 최근의 추세에 비추어 볼 때 위증죄의 쟁점을 파악하기 위해서는 더 이상 실체법적인 문제에 국한해서는 해결의 실마리를 찾을 수 없으며, 형사소송법에 규정된 여러 가지 증인신문과 관련된 쟁점, 즉 선서의무, 증인적격, 증언거부권, 증인신문절차와 증인선서절차의 구별여부, 증인의 진술대상 및 범위, 공동피고인의 지위, 소송절차의 분리 등과 관련된 심도 있는 절차법적인 접근이 필수적으로 요구된다고 하겠다. 본고에서는 이와 같은 위증죄의 실체법적 및 절차법적인 쟁점에 대한 최근 대법원 판례의 태도 및 학설의 입장을 전반적으로 고찰해 보기로 하는데, 먼저 위증죄의 주체에 해당하는 ‘법률에 의하여 선서한 증인’의 해석과 관련하여, 피고인 및 공동피고인의 증인적격, 증언거부권의 의의, 증언거부권의 고지제도 및 미고지에 따른 법적 효과 등을 중심으로 살펴보고, 다음으로 위증죄의 행위태양인 ‘허위의 진술’의 해석과 관련하여, 허위의 의미와 관련된 주관설과 객관설의 대립, 진술의 대상 및 내용 등을 분석해 본다. 이후 그 밖의 문제로서 위증죄의 기수시기, 피고인이 자신의 형사사건에서 위증을 교사한 경우의 죄책, 위증범죄에 있어서 법정형의 불균형 등을 검토한 후, 논의를 마무리하기로 한다. The substantive law and adjective, when it comes to criminal law, always form an interdependent relationship, and the crime that typically demonstrates this characteristic is perjury. Perjury serves as a role of preventing any harm, or factors that jeopardize just judgment, given to hearing that is carried out in order to seek substantive truth by the court or judging authority through securing the accuracy of the witness’s statement ensured under oath. Under the 1st clause of Article 152 of the Criminal Law, the perjury is regulated as this: “the witness who made an oath by law and then gives a false statement will face up to five years in prison and a maximum 10 million won in fines”. It is true that the conventional debates on the perjury were mainly focused on the perspective of the benefit and protection of the law with regard to what false witness means that is an objective constituent, confrontation of theories involved in the time of consummation and investigation of the precedents. This indicates that perjury was mostly discussed by the approach of substantive law. In recent years, however, the trend of using the approach of adjective law is fast growing in dealing with perjury, escaping from the conventional way of discussion. The main reason of such a change can be found in the current of the Supreme Court’s cases lately sentenced regarding perjury. In light of this recent trend, it is no longer possible to find a clue in order to identify the issues of perjury if we continue to remain in the approach of substantive law. In this regard, it is required that we need some in-depth examination of the approach of adjective law for several issues of examination of a witness prescribed in the Criminal Procedure Law, such as obligation of oath, eligibility of witness, right for refusal of witness, the distinction between the procedure of witness examination and procedure of witness oath, the target of the witness for statement and the range of statement, the status of co-defendant, and separation of legal procedure.

검 · 경 수사권조정에 대한 비판적 분석: 2020. 2. 4.자 개정 형사소송법 및 검찰청법의 내용을 중심으로

박찬걸(Park, Chan-geol) 한국형사법무정책연구원 2020 형사정책연구 Vol.121 No.-

공법 : 특정 성범죄자의 신상정보 활용제도의 문제점과 개선방안 -성범죄자 등록,고지,공개제도를 중심으로-

박찬걸 ( Chan Keol Park ) 한양대학교 법학연구소 2010 법학논총 Vol.27 No.4

Juvenile sex protection law recently amended releases through the Internet detailed information of sexual offenders(name, age, physical characteristics, photo, address) unlike the past releasing method. The Court determined to disclose of personal information on the sexual criminals for youth and notify their identities such as name, birth date, occupation, address(city, county and district) and crimes that have committed on the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family`s homepage. The National Assembly passed revised law related to prevention of sex offence against juvenile; revised law to strengthen the registration of sex offenders, to introduce the notification of sex offenders etc. But the present sanction to the sex offender is not enough to prevent the offence. So nationwide notification method must be amended in order not to violate the privacy of offenders and their family and we should devise a better system for the protection of human rights. Finally In order to prevent sexual exploitations and violences against juveniles, what is needed for diminishing sex offences is not to make new sort of treatment or sentence heavier punishment but to supplement the current system by making the analysis process more efficient.

강간죄의 객체로서 "아내"의 인정 여부에 관한 소고

박찬걸 ( Chan Keol Park ) 한양대학교 법학연구소 2009 법학논총 Vol.26 No.2

Korean has not admitted marital rape punishable conduct since 1970`s judgement of Supreme Court. In other words, The Korean jurisprudence has maintained the marital rape exemption even if Korean Penal Code itself does not provide any basis for the exemption. According to existing laws, rape by her husband is also punished at least 3 years imprisonment. And established theories also have denied coerced intercourse between husband and wife as crime. These case admitted only intimidation, coercion and violence. But coerced intercourse with serious violence by husband must be punished. After due consideration this point, recently judgement of Supreme Court and judgement of Bu-san district Court admitted martial rape. If nation does not intervene these serious criminal conducts, husbands rape his wife easy. Indeed marital rape by husband is occurred mostly under the same house. There is no rational basis for distinguishing between marital rape and non-marital rape. Marriage has never been viewed as giving a husband the right to coerced intercourse on demand. Certainly a marriage license should not be viewed as a license for a husband to forcibly rape his wife with impunity. A wife has the same right to control her own body as does an unmarried women. We need not established new act or provision marital rape, because present criminal act contains marital rape as crime. So through explanation of present criminal act`s `Bu-nyeo`, the rape by husband could be punished.

청소년비행예방센터의 효율적인 운영방안 - 관련 법령의 정비방안을 중심으로 -

박찬걸 ( Park Chan-keol ) 한국소년정책학회 2012 少年保護硏究 Vol.19 No.-

It is most desirable to have comprehensive stipulations related to the task, jurisdiction and organization in the Law for the Treatment of Protected Juvenile like other juvenile protection agencies and define more concrete matters in the lower enforcement regulation in detail. The reason is that, if the upper law would have excessively detail stipulation, it can cause unreasonable consequence such as difficulty in new project execution or the law would be limited to the stipulated project only. Especially, matters like operation of various programs that other juvenile protection agencies do not enforce such as Daily Experience or Family Solution Camp should have their legal base in the lower enforcement regulation. At the same time, the Juvenile Law should also have stipulations on Juvenile Misdemeanors Prevention Center in parallel with Youth Detention Center and Juvenile Protection Education Institution. In consideration of above, it is believed that the representative stipulations in the Law for the Treatment of Protected Juvenile would be added or revised as following.

고위공직자범죄수사처의 독립성 및 정치적 중립성 확보방안에 대한 검토

박찬걸(Park Chan-Geol) 한국형사정책학회 2020 刑事政策 Vol.32 No.1

「고위공직자범죄수사처 설치 및 운영에 관한 법률」이 2020. 7. 15.부터 시행될 예정이다. 고위공직자범죄수사처 설치의 주된 목적이 과거에는 고위공직자의 부정부패를 척결하기 위한 것이었다면 2020년 현재의 상황에서는 강력한 검찰개혁의 일환으로 추진되었다는 점에서 큰 차이가 있다. 그 동안 수많은 검찰개혁의 방안이 제시되어 실제로 시행되었음에도 불구하고, 검찰개혁이 완수되기는커녕 오히려 갈수록 그 필요성이 더욱 대두되는 형국에 이르렀다. 특히 야심차게 도입된 특별검사제도는 그 한시적 기능과 대상의 한정성 등 여러 가지 원인으로 말미암아 실패에 실패를 거듭하였고, 이는 보다 폭넓은 고위공직자범죄를 대상으로 상시적으로 수사를 할 수 있는 독립된 수사기관의 창설에 이르는 결과를 초래하였다. 그러므로 현재의 상황에서 고위공직자범죄수사처 설치 여부에 대한 찬반 견해의 대립은 더 이상 소모적인 논쟁으로 치부될 것이므로, 향후 고위공직자범죄수사처의 합리적인 운영방안에 대한 논의로 초점이 맞추어질 것이 분명하다. 그렇다면 여기서 말하는 수사처의 ‘합리적인 운영방안’이란 과연 구체적으로 무엇을 말하는가? 그리고 수사처의 합리적인 운영을 위하여 인적․물적 조직의 구성과 체계 전반을 관통해야 하는 이념은 무엇인가? 이러한 물음의 해답으로서 본고는 수사처 운영의 필수적인 전제를 직무독립성과 정치적 중립성에서 찾고자 한다. 이에 따라 본고에서는 국회를 통과한 수사처법의 구체적인 내용을 크게 ‘조직의 구성’부분과 ‘직무’부분으로 나누어 독립성 및 정치적 중립성이라는 두 가지 관점에 입각하여 검토함으로써 현재의 수사처가 과연 설립취지에 어느 정도 부합하는지 여부를 판단해 봄과 동시에, 향후 운영과정에서 이에 보다 부합할 수 있는 세부적인 개선방안을 제시해 보고자 한다. The ｢Act on Establishment and Operation of High-Ranking Officials’ Corruption Investigation Agency｣ will take effect from July 15, 2020. In the present situation of 2020, there is a huge difference in the way that the main purpose of establishment of a High-Ranking Officials’ Corruption Investigation Agency was to fight against illegalities and corruption of high-ranking officials in the past, but it is now pushed ahead as part of strong reform of the prosecutors. Despite a number of plans for reform of the prosecutors had been suggested and actually enforced so far, reform of the prosecutors had not even come to close to accomplishment, and the necessity has come to the fore even more. Especially, the independent special prosecutor system which was adopted ambitiously repeated failure for various reasons such as temporary function, limitations on the subject etc., which led to the result of establishing an independent investigative agency capable of investigating a wide range of crimes by high-ranking officials on a permanent basis. For the reasons, conflict of pros and cons about establishment of High-Ranking Officials’ Corruption Investigation Agency will be considered wasteful dispute in the present situation, so it is clear that the discussion will be focused on reasonable operating plan of the agency in the future. Then, what does ‘reasonable operating plan’ for investigative agency here stand for concretely? And is it possible to bring in the ideology of constituting human resources and materials of investigative agency and penetrating the overall system for rational operation of investigative agency? As an answer to the question, this manuscript intends to find essential premise for the operation of investigative agency in the independence of duty and political neutrality. From now on, this manuscript will make a judgment how much the present investigative agency accord with the purpose of its establishment and suggest a detailed improvement plan for the process of future operation to make it more suitable to its objectives by dividing details of the Act on Establishment and Operation of High-Ranking Officials’ Corruption Investigation Agency that passed through Parliament largely into organization and duty of the agency from the two perspectives of independence of duty and political neutrality.

경찰권과 검찰권의 조정을 통한 ‘국가수사청’ 설치에 대한 시론

박찬걸 ( Park Chan-geol ) 한국비교형사법학회 2018 비교형사법연구 Vol.20 No.1

국가수사청의 핵심은 수사와 공소를 분리한 후 수사권을 갖는 전문적이고 독립적인 국가수사청을 설치하고, 검사와 사법경찰이 동 기관에 소속되어 검사는 수사지휘를, 사법경찰은 수사를 담당하는 것이라고 할 수 있다. 즉 하나의 수사기관에서 검사와 사법경찰관리가 함께 직무를 수행하면서 검사는 수사지휘를, 사법경찰은 수사를 담당하는 것이다. 이는 현재의 수사기관과 별개로 수사청을 추가하는 것이 아니라 현재 검찰과 사법경찰로 양분되고 있는 2개의 수사기관을 하나로 통합하여 검찰청이나 경찰청과 분리하는 것이라고 할 수 있다. 이와 같이 국가수사청을 신설하여 수사검사와 사법경찰이 함께 근무하면서 수사권을 전담하고, 검찰청은 공소권을 담당하며, 경찰청은 범죄예방과 질서유지 등 행정경찰작용만을 담당하는 것이다. 국가수사청은 검찰과 경찰의 권한과 조직을 합리적으로 조정하여 분리해야 할 것은 분리하고, 통합해야 할 것은 통합함으로써 국가의 형사사법작용의 효율성을 극대화하고자 하는 목적을 지니고 있는데, 이것이 기존의 특별 수사기구와 다른 가장 큰 특징이라고 할 수 있다. 형사사법의 기본구조가 규문주의에서 탄핵주의로 변화되어 소추권과 심판권을 분리한 것과 동일선상에서 검찰사법에 대하여도 검찰이 독점하는 수사권과 공소권을 분리할 필요성이 인정된다. 소추하는 자가 심판하면 그 심판은 소추하는 자에게 유리할 수밖에 없다는 문제의식은 수사와 공소의 관계에서도 동일하게 적용될 수 있기 때문이다. 객관적이고 중립적인 입장에서의 수사결과에 따라 기소 여부가 결정되어야 하는데, 수사권과 공소권을 동시에 가진 기관이 기소 여부에 대한 결정을 미리 하고 있는 상황이라면 그에 따라 수사의 내용과 집중도가 달라질 수밖에 없는 것이다. 현재 검찰이 가지고 있는 권한을 합리적으로 조정하기 위해서는 작은 권한의 일부 배분이 아니라 수사와 공소를 분리하는 근본적인 구조개혁이 필요하다고 할 수 있다. The key point of National Investigation Administration is to operate investigation and prosecution independently, establish a professional and independent national investigation administration having investigation authority, and to include prosecutor and judicial police in the same agency where prosecutor commands investigation and judicial police takes charge of investigation. In other words, prosecutor and judicial police perform their duties together with each other in an investigation agency where prosecutor commands investigation and judicial police takes charge of investigation. This cannot be said to add an investigation administration, setting aside from the current investigation agency, but to integrate the two investigation agencies divided into prosecution and judicial police with a single one by separating it from prosecutor's office or police administration. Such as this, National Investigation Agency where investigation prosecutor and judicial police worked together to have entire investigation authority was newly built, while prosecutor's office performs prosecution powers and police administration solely performs administrative police actions such as crime prevention and maintenance of order. National Investigation Administration has its objective to maximize efficiency of national crime judicial action by mediating the authorities of police, prosecution and organization in a rational manner and separating what needs to be separated and integrating what needs to be integrated. This is one of the starkest characteristics that is different from the existing special investigation organization. The research study is to analyze the problems with excessive authority and the position as quasi-judicial agency in relation to fairness of prosecution judgement, and the problems with prosecution investigation and indictment caused by double investigation by the police and prosecutor's office mainly focusing on admissibility of evidence of protocol of examination of a suspect, and the ones with trust of people about police investigation, dual command chain, and police investigation mainly focusing on the side effect caused by sending overall cases to prosecutor's office. Subsequently, the study is to place the emphasis on the need to reinforce trial-central system, disperse power by separating investigation from prosecution, and to introduce integrated investigation organization based on establishing equal co-operative relations between prosecution and police to finish the discussion by pursuing a concrete method for separating administrative police from judicial police; investigation examination from trial examination and abolishing prosecution investigation officer system and the interrogation procedure of suspect at the police level.

군 영창제도의 문제점과 개선방안

박찬걸 ( Park Chan-keol ) 홍익대학교 법학연구소 2017 홍익법학 Vol.18 No.1

1962. 1. 20. 「군인사법」(법률 제1006호) 제정 당시부터 규정되고 있었던 영창처분에 대하여 군대 내 인권개선이라는 측면에서 여러 가지의 문제점이 지적되어 왔고, 이에 대한 보완작업이 이루어지고 있다. 우선 2006. 4. 28. 「군인사법」개정을 통하여 포괄적으로 정하고 있는 군인의 징계사유의 구체화, 영창처분의 남용 방지를 위하여 영창처분의 보충성 강화, 영창처분의 적법성을 심사하기 위한 인권담당 군법무관 제도 도입, 징계입창자의 친족 등에 대한 영창처분 고지제도 도입, 영창처분에 대한 항고시 집행정지의 효력 부여 등의 보완을 하였다. 그리고 「군인사법」제56조부터 제61조까지의 규정에 따라 군인의 징계에 필요한 사항을 규정하는 것을 목적으로 2007. 8. 22. 「군인징계령」을 제정하여 시행하고 있으며, 2007. 11. 22. 제정된 「군인징계령 시행규칙」제2조 제1호 나목에서는 병사에 대한 징계 양정의 세부기준을 별표에서 구체적으로 규정하고 있다. 또한 징계입창자에 대한 처우 기준 및 절차를 규정함으로써 영창집행 과정에서의 적법성을 보장하고, 징계입창자의 인권을 보장하기 위하여 「징계입창자 영창집행 및 처우 기준에 관한 훈령」을 2011. 2. 14. 제정하여 시행하고 있다. 하지만 이와 같은 개선과 노력에도 불구하고 영창처분의 문제점에 대한 지적은 지속적으로 제기되고 있으며, 근본적인 쟁점에 대한 변화는 별 차이가 없는 것으로 파악된다. 예를 들면, 법관의 영장 없이 실질적인 구금처우를 한다는 점에서 헌법상 보장된 영장주의의 위배, 영창기간이 군 복무기간에 산입되지 않는다는 점에서 이중처벌금지 원칙의 위배, 영창의 설치가 법률에 근거를 두고 있지 않다는 점에서 법률유보 원칙의 위배, 징계입창자를 미결수용자뿐만 아니라 기결수와 동일한 공간에 구금하면서 상대적으로 열악한 처우를 한다는 점에서 비례의 원칙의 위배, 영창처분의 부과 주체를 일선 중대장까지로 폭넓게 규정하고 있다는 점에서 과잉금지의 원칙의 위배 등을 들 수 있다. 이러한 논의상황을 배경으로 이하의 본고에서는, 군 영창처분의 현황 및 절차를 중심으로 현 실태를 분석해 보고, 이를 바탕으로 영장주의의 위배, 적법절차의 원칙의 위배, 과잉금지의 원칙의 위배 등을 중심으로 한 문제점을 분석한 후, 영창처분의 전격적인 폐지 및 징계처분의 다양화 방안을 제시하며, 논의를 마무리하기로 한다. With respect to the guardhouse disposition which has been regulated from the time of enactment of the 「Military Personnel Management Act」(No. 1006 of the Law) on January 20, 1962, many problems have been pointed out in terms of improvement of human rights in the armed forces and supplementation work for the aforementioned is being made. First of all, through the revision of the 「Military Personnel Management Act」on April 28, 2006, specification of causes for disciplinary action on servicepersons that were comprehensively regulated, enhancement of guardhouse disposition for prevention of abuse of guardhouse disposition, introduction of military judicial officer system in charge of human rights for examining legality of guardhouse disposition의 legality, introduction of notice system for guardhouse disposition for relatives of prisoners and granting force for suspension of execution at the time of appealing against guardhouse disposition have been supplemented. And for the purpose of regulating matters necessary for disciplinary action on servicepersons in accordance with regulations from Article 56 through 61 of the「Military Personnel Management Act」, the 「Ordinance on the Disciplinary Action against Servicepersons」has been enacted and enforced from August 22, 2007, and Namok of Item 1 of Article 2 of the 「Enforcement Regulations of the Ordinance on the Disciplinary Action against Servicepersons」which was enacted on November 22, 2007 is concretely regulating detailed standards for weighing of disciplinary action against soldiers in its annex. And the 「Instructions on the Standards for Guardhouse Execution and Treatment of Prisoners in Guardhouse」has also been enacted and executed from February 14, 2011 to guarantee legality of guardhouse disposition and human rights of prisoners in the execution process of guardhouse by regulating standards and procedure of treatment for prisoners. Notwithstanding such improvement and efforts, however, problems of guardhouse disposition have continued to be raised and examples include violation of warrant requirement which is guaranteed in the Constitution in the terms of detaining without a warrant from a judge, violation of the principle of prohibition on cumulative penalties in the way that the period of detention in a guardhouse is not included in the term of military service, violation of the principle of statutory reservation in the way that installation of guardhouse is not based on the law and violation of the principle of proportionality in terms of detaining prisoners in a same place with convicts as well as pretrial detainees providing inferior treatment. Based on such a discussible situation, this manuscript analyzes the reality focusing on the present conditions and procedures of military guardhouse disposition, and aims to analyze problems focusing on the violation of warrant requirement, violation of due process and violation of equality based on the foregoing, and will finish discussion proposing lightning abolition of guardhouse disposition and suggesting a plan for diversification of disciplinary actions.