개정 형사소송법상 공판준비절차

황태정 한국비교형사법학회 2010 비교형사법연구 Vol.12 No.2

The purpose of preparatory proceedings is to find out intensive and effective judicial proceedings of trial date subject to realization of court-oriented trials. The preparatory proceedings can keep point of issue as well as evidence of the case in order in advance to make judicial proceedings plan and to help have effective criminal trial: But, the preparatory proceedings may have preliminary procedure being similar to judicial proceedings to produce form of trial procedure and to have infringement upon defendant's basic rights of the Constitution such as refusal rights of statement and to require careful approach of formation and operation of the system. The preparatory proceedings does not assert nor evidence substance of a case in accordance with the principle of exclusion of presupposition, and it shall not deal with important matters that may have influence upon trials in the future, for instance, permission of changes of indictment, ruling on application for evidence and decision on the discovery, etc. And, the protocol in preparation for the trial that is admitted to have absolute admissibility of evidence shall exclude substance and fill out matters that are required to make issues of a case and to keep evidence in order and to make plan of evidence. The regulation of submission in writing at preparatory proceedings may have infringement upon refusal rights of statement of the defendant so that the defendant shall be allowed to be given help from a lawyer at submission in writing: In particular, the written opinion shall not ask for statement on admission of the facts concerning the public prosecution. And, decision on submission to the preparatory proceedings had better reflect concerned party's ideas through either hearing of concerned party's ideas or appeal of dissatisfaction of court judgment, and standard of the submission should be made to obtain forecast of sending to the court. The preparatory proceedings may have the greatest difference of legal effects at prohibition of post-application of evidence. In this regard, a way should be found out to respect regulations of existing laws and to lessen adverse effects of regulations of prohibition of post-application of evidence as much as possible. When the court admits of needs, it can investigate evidence at its discretion or alleviate standards of interpretation of reasons of the exception at prima facie evidence: Otherwise, the court may give concerned party an opportunity of application to the evidence after resuming preparation for the trial.

자유심증주의의 범위와 한계

황태정 한국형사판례연구회 2019 刑事判例硏究 Vol.27 No.-

The cause of the crime should be judged synthetically through a subjective evaluation of the motive of the crime as well as an objective evaluation based on the laws of science. In order to make a guilty judgment based on indirect evidence(circumstantial evidence), the evidence must be strictly related to the facts that require proof(factum probandum), and it should be a practical matter to rule out the rational hypothesis that the accused is not guilty. However, it can not be said that the demand for such relevance and substantivity should exclude all irrational hypotheses on the accused. The legal maxim ‘in dubio pro reo’ serves as the lighthouse of the night sea, which leads the judgment to the right destination, but the lighthouse is not the destination of the ship named ‘free evaluation of evidence’. The important thing is to take the lighthouse warning and head for the right destination. From this perspective, it will be necessary to appreciate the intent of Supreme Court’s decision, which states that “The recognition of guilt in a criminal trial shall be based on the proof beyond reasonable doubt. It does not, however, require a degree to exclude all possible doubts that are not rational. It is not permissible to exclude evidence with probative power based on suspicion without reasonable grounds because it is beyond the limitations of the Principle of Free Evaluation of Evidence.”

형법상 동의의 법적 효과와 한계

황태정 한국형사법학회 2007 한국형사법학회 학술대회 논문집 Vol.2007 No.1

정당화와 면책의 비교법적 고찰

황태정 경기대학교 사회과학연구소 2015 한국사회연구 Vol.18 No.-

‘범죄’가 무엇인지에 대하여 종래 견해의 대립이 있었으나 20 세기 초반 이후 범죄의 성립 여부는 구성요건해당성, 위법성, 책 임의 3단계를 거쳐 검토되어야 한다는 3단계 범죄론체계가 주류적인 견해로 받아들여지게 되었다. 구성요건(Tatbestand)이란 형벌의 근거가 되는 행위유형을 기술한 것을, 구성요건해당성은 구체적인 행위가 이러한 객관적인 법률상 요건과 일치하는 것을 말한다. 위법성(Rechtwidrigkeit)은 구성요건에 해당하는 행위가 법질서 전체의 관점에서 허용되지 않음을 의미하며, 책임 (Schuld)은 구성요건에 해당하는 위법한 행위에 대하여 행위자를 개인적으로 비난할 수 있느냐의 문제를 말한다. 3단계 범죄론체 계에서는 이 세 가지가 모두 구비되어야 비로소 범죄가 ‘성립’ 되었다고 한다. 3단계 범죄론체계 중 위법성과 책임의 단계는 구성요건에 해당하는 행위이지만 예외적으로 사회적 허용성이 인정되거나 개인적 비난가능성이 없는 경우를 걸러내는 형태, 즉 구성요건해당행위 에 내포된 위법성을 배제하여 위법한 행위를 정당화(justification) 하거나, 구성요건해당행위에 대해 가해지는 책임비난을 면제 (excuse)하는 형태로 구성되어 있다. 이처럼 범죄의 성립을 저지하는 사유를 강학상 ‘정당화사유 또는 위법성조각사유’ 및 ‘면책 사유 또는 책임조각·감경사유’라 한다. 이 논문에서는 주요 선진국의 정당화사유 및 면책사유에 관한 입법례를 살펴보고 이들을 통해 우리 입법의 타당성 및 우수성을 검토함으로써, 현행법의 합리적 개선방안을 모색해 보고자 한다. In contrast to the Continental Criminal Law, AngloAmerican Criminal Law has developed from case law. Therefore the system or legal theory between the two legal system is quite different. So with the justifications. In Continental Criminal Law, there are legal defense, necessity, defense of claim, victim's consent and legitimacy; in AngloAmerican Criminal Law selfdefense, defense ofotherparties, defense of property, defense of habitation, necessity, and legal enforcement defense. A justification defense is one that indicates society's belief that the defendant's conduct was morally good, socially desirable, or not wrongful. In order to establish selfdefense, the defendant may be required to prove that the defendant was not the aggressor; the defendant reasonably perceived an immediate threat of bodily harm; the defendant reasonably believed that the defensive force was necessary to avoid the harm; and the amount of defensive force used was reasonable. The provision of the justifiable act could function many things as belows; according criminal law to common sense, making reasonable criminal law, applicating criminal law as right time etc. So we should interpret the provision of the justifiable act actively and widely. If we can regulate the illegal act with civil law, administrative law besides criminal law, we have to apply more mitigative law.

불법적·반윤리적 목적의 승낙과 상해

황태정 한국형사판례연구회 2011 刑事判例硏究 Vol.19 No.-

A subject of demand on appropriateness in accordance with social rules is thought to be the most important at behaviors by the consent. In other words, estimate of the action by criminal law shall be discussed not by an actor's internal will but by infringement upon legal interest at outside world. Either purpose or motive of the one who has infringed upon legal interest with consent shall not be considered at the estimate of appropriateness of social rules. Therefore, the subject that shall limit consent by social rules shall be not motives and purposes of the consent but ‘an action that infringes upon legal interest’ in accordance with the consent. What type of infringement upon legal interest does limit justification? The problem is related to ‘scope’ of the demand on appropriateness of social rules. Unless special provisions which punish crimes such as murder and abortion regardless of consent, Article 24 of the Criminal Act shall be applied to the crimes of all of private legal interests considering legislation purpose and systematic position. Majority of the scholars think that infringement upon legal interest of other crime types than aforementioned crimes require appropriateness of social rules, and ‘bodily injury’ with consent can be of problem. Considering various kinds of spectrum of bodily injury, the discussion has reached ‘degree’ of demand on appropriateness of social rules, in other words, scope of the permit of bodily injury subject to the consent.The value and specialty of legal interest of bodily injury subject to the consent can be discussed: But, medical treatment for beauty care, minor bodily injury and others that have minor bodily injury with consent of entity of legal interest need not be protected by the Criminal Act. When bodily injury subject to the consent jeopardizes existence of legal entity to threaten life or equivalent and to be serious, punishment against the action is thought to be admitted despite consent. Article 258(Aggravated Bodily Injury) of the Criminal Act can be used for reference.

연구결과 소개 : 간이형사재판제도의 효율화 방안

황태정 한국형사정책연구원 2005 형사정책연구소식 Vol.91 No.-

비교형사법연구 20년간의 논의와 성과: 형법각론 분야

황태정 한국비교형사법학회 2020 비교형사법연구 Vol.22 No.1

This study looked over the papers on individual crime of criminal law published in the Korean Journal of Comparative Criminal Law(KJCCL) over the past 20 years. In the meantime, various studies have been conducted on socially important types of crime, and it can be evaluated that there has been a great achievement in Korean criminal law. However, I think 'comparative legal perspective', which can be called the identity of the journal specializing in comparative criminal law, was somewhat lacking. This study seeks to make some suggestions to solve this problem. First, academic conferences should be organized around the ‘Comparative Law,’ which is the core identity of the Korean Association of Comparative Criminal Law(KACCL). In order to have the practicality that matches the name, the concept of ‘comparative law’ should be clearly revealed from the planning stage of the academic conference. Through in-depth research on foreign criminal law and comparative research with foreign criminal law, it will be possible to achieve academic achievement different from other criminal law-related academic societies. Second, papers published in KJCCL should also be composed under the theme of ‘comparative law’. To this end, the editorial board needs to recruit papers on comparative law under a long-term and systematic plan. In addition, it would be a good idea to make an organization such as the ‘Comparative Law Board’(tentative name) composed of researchers who are fluent in major languages within the society. If the board were able to systematically introduce foreign legislation on current issues, it would not only provide reliable information to other researchers, but also contribute to improve the status of KJCCL specializing in comparative law. I wish the KACCL and KJCCL will continue to develop on the basis of the brilliant achievements of the past 20 years. 이 연구는 지난 20년간 비교형사법연구에 게재된 형법각론 분야 논문을 다양한 각도에서 살펴보았다. 20년간 형법각칙상 개별주제에 대한 연구는 물론 다양한 특별법상 주제에 대한 연구가 다양하게 이루어졌고, 사회적으로 중요하고 법적 규명의 필요성이 높은 주제나 사안에 대해서는 여러 명의 필자에 의한 심도 깊은 논의가 펼쳐졌던 것으로 평가된다. 다만, 비교법학 전문 학술지의 이름에 걸맞지 않게 게재된 논문들의 비교법적 색채가 부족하고, 학술회의의 기획이나 학술지의 구성에 있어서도 비교법적 논의의 장이 체계화되어 있지 않았다는 점은 아쉬운 점으로 생각된다. 이러한 문제점의 개선을 위해 다음의 몇 가지를 제언하고자 한다. 첫째, ‘비교법’을 중심으로 학술회의를 기획해야 한다. 학회 출범 당시 네이밍의 내력이야 어찌 되었든 이제 ‘비교’는 우리 학회의 핵심적 정체성이다. 옷을 입었으면 그에 걸맞는 실질을 갖추어야 하듯, 학술회의 구성에 있어 기본적으로 ‘비교법’ 컨셉이 선명하게 드러나도록 해야 한다. 춘계와 하계는 공동학술회의로 진행되는 만큼 운신의 폭이 크지 않겠지만, 추계와 동계 학술회의만큼은 대주제부터 비교법을 전면에 내세운 기획을 할 필요가 있다. 둘째, ‘비교법’을 중심으로 한 학술지 구성이 필요하다. 비교형사법연구의 특집은 당연히 비교법 연구여야 할 것이고(예컨대 정당화사유의 비교법적 검토), 그 기획은 학회가 맡아 개별 연구자가 할 수 없는 체계적 연구성과로 남겨야 한다. 또 학회 차원에서 가칭 ‘비교법연구위원회’와 같은 기구를 만들고 여기에 주요 언어별로 연구위원을 위촉하여 현안 발생시 해당 분야에 대한 외국 입법례를 체계적으로 소개하는 등의 특집을 마련할 수 있다면 더없이 좋을 것이다. 다른 연구자들에게 신뢰성 있는 자료를 제공할 수 있음은 물론, 비교법 전문 학술지로서의 위상 또한 높일 수 있는 계기가 될 것이다. 셋째, 한중학술회의의 세부적 기획이 필요하다. 올해로 총 17회째 개최된 한중학술회의 연구성과를 분석한 결과, 1회성 기획에서 비롯된 일관성 없고 반복되는 연구주제, 외국발표용으로 작성된 포괄적‧망라적인 연구내용 등 몇몇 부분에 개선이 필요할 것으로 판단되었다. 이를 해소하기 위해서는 학술회의 기획 단계부터 양국 관심사안인 대주제의 범위를 최대한 좁히고, 동일국 발표주제 사이에 중복이 발생하지 않도록 조치하며, 가급적 양국에 동일한 제목으로 발표를 의뢰하면 좋을 것이다. 논의될 내용에 대한 예측가능성 확보와 함께 깊이 있는 토론의 가능성을 높일 수 있을 것으로 생각한다.

형법에 의한 인격권보호와 명예훼손법제

황태정 한국비교형사법학회 2012 비교형사법연구 Vol.14 No.2

재외국민보호법 제정 필요성 및 법률안 검토

황태정 국회입법조사처 2016 입법과 정책 Vol.8 No.1

These days, number of tourists in foreign countries reached 19 million and 7 million Koreans reside and stay in foreign countries along by the trend of globalization and door open policy. With the increase of Korean nationals residing abroad, the number of Korean nationals getting involved in criminal cases or becoming a victim of crimes are also increasing. Kidnap and killing of Korean people in Iraq and Afghanistan, kidnap of Korean crews by pirates in Somalia, and Suspicion of the Chinese government's torture of a North Korean human rights activist can be good examples. Recent murder cases of Korean people in the Philippines evidenced that protection of Korean nationals residing abroad is urgent issue in the area of criminal policy. However, currently there is no legal basis which specifies the Government's obligation of protection of Korean nationals residing abroad stated in the constitution, thereby systematic protection of such individuals have been underdeveloped. Government's responsibility of protecting the people should be prescribed to establish protection system of Korean nationals residing abroad, to protect lives and properties of Korean nationals residing abroad and to guarantee safe activities of Korean nationals residing abroad. The paper investigates advantages and disadvantages of the six bills of Protection of Korean Nationals Residing Abroad Act pending in the 19th National Assembly, and to suggest desirable legislation. This paper can be a basis for enactment of the Protection of Korean Nationals Residing Abroad Act. 오늘날 전 세계적인 세계화・개방화 추세와 우리나라의 국력신장 및 국제교류 증진으로 해외여행객이 연간 1,900만 명, 해외에 거주・체류하는 재외동포가 700만 명을 넘어서고 있다. 국외에서 활동하거나 체류하는 우리 국민이 대폭 늘어나면서 우리 국민들과 관련된 각종 범죄 및 사건・사고가 빈발하고 있는바, 이라크와 아프가니스탄에서의 한국인 납치・살해사건, 소말리아 일대 해적의 한국 선원 납치사건, 예멘 테러사건 및 중국 정부에 의한 북한 인권운동가 김영환씨 고문 의혹 등은 그 대표적인 예라고 할 것이다. 특히 최근 수차례에 걸쳐 발생한 필리핀 거주 한국인에 대한 살인사건은 이제 형사정책적 차원에서도 해외에 거주・체류하는 재외국민보호가 더 이상 미룰 수 없는 현안 과제임을 상기케 하고 있다. 그러나 현재로서는 헌법에 명시된 국가의 재외국민보호 의무를 구체화하고 있는 근거 법률이 없어 재외국민의 체계적 보호를 위한 시스템 및 제도가 매우 취약한 실정에 있다. 따라서 재외국민이 처할 수 있는 범죄 등 해외 위난상황에 대비하여 국가의 구체적인 국민보호 의무를 규정하고 재외국민보호체계를 확립함으로써 재외국민의 생명과 재산을 보호하고 나아가 국민의 안전한 해외활동을 보장할 필요가 있다.

문서 부정행사죄의 불법과 권한중심 해석

황태정 한국형사판례연구회 2015 刑事判例硏究 Vol.23 No.-

The Criminal Act has regulations of criminal punishment against illegal use of authenticated document. The one who has made out document without authority and/or false document with authority shall be punished in the use of document. But, punishment against use of document truly made by authorized person is thought to be exceptional considering benefit of document crime of “public reliability on the document.” Then, what’s the meaning of“unlawful uttering” may be of problem. Supreme Court's judicial precedent has adopted not only authority of use of document but also original usage of document to judge illegal use and has made four cases to have different legal judgment. But this study adopted authority of use of document as an only standard for unlawful uttering considering differences depending upon rights in document crimes, and interpretation of various kinds of ‘illegal use’ from point of view of the Criminal Act and related special laws. Unlawful uttering has no reason to judge depending upon original usage of the document, and extends scope of punishment at punishment against unlawful uttering of document up to other purpose of use. The loss and damage at other purpose of use is out of scope of legal benefit of unlawful uttering is thought to be inappropriate. To admit of unlawful uttering from point of view of Supreme Court's judicial precedent, expansion of scope of original usage may expand scope of the punishment to violate principle of Nullum Crimen, Nulla Poena Sine Lege. In this case, Supreme Court's judgment that did not admit of unlawful uttering was thought to be appropriate, but Supreme Court's basic position that followed judgment standard of original usage than authority of the use should be reconsidered.