http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 조상혁(Sanghyeok Cho) (검색결과 4 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
국제형사재판소에서의 피해자배상 판결에서의 배상유형과 배상양식
조상혁(Sanghyeok Cho) 한국피해자학회 2020 被害者學硏究 Vol.28 No.2
국제형사재판소(ICC)가 설립된 이후 피해자배상명령이 내려진 것은 루방가(Lubanga) 사건, 카탕가(Katanga) 사건 및 알 마흐디(Al Mahdi) 사건 등 총 3개의 사건이다. 본 논문은 이 세 개의 사건에서 국제형사재판소의 재판부가 어떠한 배상유형(개인적 배상, 집단적 배상 그리고 개인적 배상 및 집단적 배상)을 어떤 이유로 선택하였는지 그리고 어떠한 배상양식(원상회복, 금전배상, 재활 및 기타 배상양식)을 어떤 이유로 선택하였는지에 대해서 고찰하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 첫 번째 배상사건인 루방가 사건에서는 재판부는 피해자신탁기금의 권고를 따랐고, 개인적 배상을 배제하였다. 그러나 두 번째 배상사건인 카탕가 사건과 세 번째 배상사건인 알 마흐디 사건에서는 재판부는 더 이상 피해자신탁기금의 권고를 따르지 않았으며, 그 대신에 개인적 배상과 집단적 배상을 둘 다 인정하였다. 현재까지는 개인적 배상의 경우에는 금전배상의 배상양식을 선택하였으며, 집단적 배상의 경우에는 재활 서비스와 상징적 조치의 배상양식을 선택하였다. Since the establishment of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the order for reparations for victims has been issued in a total of three cases: the Lubanga case, the Katanga case and the Al Mahdi case. The purpose of this paper is to examine what types of reparations (personal reparation, collective reparation and personal reparation and collective reparation) was chosen by the International Criminal Court in these three cases and what modalities of reparations (recovery, monetary compensation, rehabilitation and other reparation forms) was chosen for. In the first case of reparation, the Lubanga case, the court followed the recommendation of the Trust Fund for Victims and ruled out personal reparation. But in the second case of Katanga and the third case of Al Mahdi, the court no longer followed the recommendation of the Victims Trust Fund, and instead recognized both personal and collective reparations. So far, the modality of monetary compensation has been chosen for personal reparation, and the modalities of rehabilitation services and symbolic measures has been selected for collective compensation.
-
판매용 음반의 공연에 관한 저작권법 제29조 제2항에 관한 연구
조상혁 ( Sanghyeok Cho ) 홍익대학교 법학연구소 2015 홍익법학 Vol.16 No.2
The study examined signification and range of record for sale, the second clause of Article 29 of copyright law and suggested its improvement. Record for sale should be narrowly interpreted as record for sale in market for 5 reasons; the second clause of Article 29 is a limit regulation of property rights; there is a possibility of unduly infringement of copyright holder’s interest due to the regulation; there is a problem of profit equilibrium between copyright holder and user; allowing commercial performance of music due to free use is not a fair use; no countries except Korea have the regulation. Additionally, in the second clause of Article 29, ‘for the purpose of nonprofit’ should be added and ‘record for sale’ should be amended to ‘commercial sound source’
-
조상혁 ( Cho Sanghyeok ) 홍익대학교 법학연구소 2016 홍익법학 Vol.17 No.3
군사법원의 관할관의 확인조치권에 대해서는 그동안 많은 비판이 계속되자, 이번 군사법원법의 개정(2016년 1월 6일 공포)에서는 확인조치권을 대폭으로 개정하였다. 첫째, 확인조치권의 제외대상인 판결에 사형, 무기징역 또는 무기금고의 판결을 추가하여 확인조치권의 대상판결을 축소하였다. 둘째, 감경권을 행사할 수 있는 대상 범죄를 작전 등 업무를 성실히 수행하는 과정에서 발생한 범죄로 한정하였다. 셋째, 감경권을 행사하는 경우에 감경할 수 있는 한도를 선고형의 3분의 1 미만으로 제한하였다. 그러나 관할관의 확인조치권은 원칙적으로 폐지되어야 할 것이다. 확인조치권은 국민의 재판을 받을 권리를 침해하는 것이며 사법의 본질을 침해하는 제도이다. 군 지휘권 행사에 사법권의 행사가 당연히 포함된다는 인식은 더 이상 유지되어서는 안된다. 군사법원의 특수성을 인정하여 관할관제도를 인정하더라도 관할관의 권한은 사법의 본질을 해치지 않는 범위내로 한정되어야 할 것이다. 비교법적으로 볼 때도 확인조치권을 인정하고 있는 나라는 영국과 미국뿐이다. 다만 평시에 관할관의 확인조치권을 폐지하여야 한다고 하더라도 전시에는 관할관의 확인조치권을 인정할 필요가 있다. Due to repeated criticism for convening authority`s confirmation procedure in martial court, the confirmation procedure was drastically amended in military court act amendment, which was proclaimed on January 6th, 2016. First, by adding capital punishment, life imprisonment, and imprisonment without labor for life to exception of the confirmation procedure, object of the confirmation procedure was reduced. Second, punishment could be reduced only when the crime happened during diligent performance of plan or task. Third, in case of exerting mitigation, limit of mitigation was under one third of sentence. However, convening authority`s confirmation procedure should be abolished as a rule. The confirmation procedure violates the right to trial and violates the nature of justice. Cognition that jurisdiction is included in military command exercise should not be maintained. Even though convening authority system can be admitted because of military court`s distinct characteristics, convening authority`s right should be within the limit of observing the nature of justice. Only the United Kingdom and the United States acknowledge the confirmation procedure. However, even though convening authority`s confirmation procedure must beabolished in peace time, it should be acknowledged in a state of war.
-
임종선(Yim, Jong-Sun),조상혁(Cho, SangHyeok) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2013 성균관법학 Vol.25 No.4
South Korea recognized advantage of branch of cooperatives as an alternative of development of economic society. Framework Act on Cooperatives was enacted in 2012. Cooperatives is Profit Corporation with commerciality. Cooperatives has its characteristic that has to operate the business that contribute to improvement of rights and interests of members of association and to community. Also it regards social unified value, equality, solidarity and trust important, and it is voluntary association Cooperatives is a path that gives new economic opportunity to people who were excluded in existing market economy system It could be called as number 3 sector economy system that is in charge of role that is different from number 1 sector, government part, such as country, and number 2 sector, the private profit organization Cooperatives tries to achieve the goal by autonomy such as self-reliance, independent and self-governing. Autonomy of cooperative association can be secured with articles of association which is legislation of self-government. Expansion of range of purpose also counted. However, the way to realize autonomy is not an exclusion of management and supervision from government. Therefore, autonomy of cooperatives is secured by autonomy by articles of incorporation It is problematical whether Framework Act on Cooperatives can perform the role of Framework Act right, and how to recognize guarantee of autonomy and limit. In order to continuously develop cooperatives and to maintain it, try to study the relation between special limit of cooperatives and social enterprise.
KCI
스콜라연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
