소년법 제67조의 위헌성에 대한 검토- 집행유예를 선고받은 소년범을 자격에 관한 특례조항의 적용대상에서 제외할 수 있는가? -

박찬걸 한국소년정책학회 2018 少年保護硏究 Vol.31 No.1

Juvenile Act can be what's called special criminal act which is limited in personal coverage in that such an act includes juvenile offenders, juveniles who are against the law, and juveniles with a criminal bent among juveniles under 19 years old. Hence, criminal cases of juveniles shall be applied to the example of general criminal cases without special provisions of Juvenile Act. However, special provisions stipulated in clause of Article 48 of Juvenile Act take special measures against criminal procedures, setting it as the main aim to help juveniles grow healthy. A general and broad review about special provisions of Juvenile Act has often been discussed in the academic circles, up to now. But as Article 67 of Juvenile Act related to ‘the Legislative Coverage of Criteria’ which has rarely been the focus of discussion relatively compared with any other special clauses is recently proclaimed as the decision incompatible with the constitution, it is judged that the field for the discussion about it would be provided. On January 25 2018, the Consitutional Court ruled that Article 67 was incompatible with the Constitution and ordered that the legislative clause would be applied continually until December 31 2018 when such a clause would be revised. The legislative body took the prompt measures against this immediately after the Consitutional Court made such a decision. Some legislative revision bills on Juvenile Act issued by Representative Haek Hye-ryeon on January 26 2018 were in response to it. It can be said that this was proposed with the main aim to complement the defect of the current laws incurred by the Consitutional Court's incompatible decision, by amending the pertained regulations so that the special case in Article 67 of Juvenile Act could be applied into the declaration of a stay of execution just like the sentence of imprisonment. In this regard, the study will analyze the provisions and specific issues in Article 67 of Juvenile Act and conduct a comparison with the declaration of a stay of execution and the sentence of imprisonment in consideration of the legal and factual attributes of the declaration of a stay of execution to review the validity of the decision incompatible with the Consitutional Court as to Article 67 of Juvenile Act and some legislative revision bills on it. .

韩国少年法的最近动向

최병문 한중법학회 2008 中國法硏究 Vol.10 No.-

Two major Acts on the substance and procedure of juvenile delinquent was passed during the plenary session of Korean National Assembly in November and promulgated in December 2007, and entered into force in June 2008. This paper introduces the two acts, i.e., “Juvenile Act” to deal with the type and dispositions of juvenile delinquent and “Act on Dispositions of Protected Juvenile, etc.” to regulate juvenile reformatory and Juvenile Classification Review Board, and makes some comments as well. The main outline of this paper is as follows:Chapter 1. IntroductionChapter 2. History of Korean Juvenile ActChapter 3. Main Issues of Revised Acts on Juvenile ProtectionChapter 4. ConclusionAppendix 1. Chinese Translation Table of Korean “Juvenile Act” 2. Chinese Translation Table of Korean “Act on Dispositions of Protected Juvenile, etc.”My evaluation on the recently revised Korean Juvenile Act can be summarized as follows: First, it is desirable to change difficult legal term into easy Korean one. Second, the range of age in juvenile protection cases was appropriately rearranged. The term “juveniles” was reduced to the person under the age of less than 19. It was extended to the juveniles who are 10 years of age or more but less than 14 years old who have committed acts in violation of Acts and subordinate statutes relating to criminal punishment. It was also expanded to the juveniles who are 10 years of age or more, fall under one of the following categories and in view of their character or environment, may be prone to commit acts in violation of Acts and subordinate statutes: (a) Juveniles who habitually move around in crowds and cause other persons a feeling of unrest; (b) Juveniles who run away from home without a justifiable reason; and (c) Juveniles who habitually make commotion under alcoholic influence or who habitually are in contact with harmful environment. Third, the introduction of public assistant system seems to be a good step for the real protection of due process and human rights of juveniles. Fourth, I think it makes institutional devices to find proper disposition for juvenile delinquent that a public prosecutor should review the pre-sentence report prepared by a classification review officer or a probation officer before making a final decision and that conditional suspension of indictment was codified. Fifth, it is prospective that the type of protective disposition is diversified and that the period of a certain disposition is somewhat adjusted. However, it is remaining task that the specific programs to realize restorative justice and other various rehabilitation programs for juvenile delinquent should be developed and specialized. Sixth, a more effective and systematic master plan needs to be prepared through the network of media, citizen, public service, industry, school and research institute, etc. based on the basic regulations for the prevention of juvenile delinquency.

소년사법의 실천방안 -6호 처분을 중심으로-

박호현 한국민간경비학회 2024 한국민간경비학회보 Vol.23 No.2

소년법은 제1조에서 ʻ반사회성(反社會性)이 있는 소년의 환경 조정과 품행 교정(矯正)을 위한 보호처분 등의 필요한 조치를 하고, 형사처분에 관한 특별조치를 함으로써 소년이 건전하게 성장하도록 돕는 것을 목적으로 한다.ʼ라고 명시함으로써 소년법이 소년보호주의에 그 기초를 두고 있음을 알 수 있다. 또한 소년법은 소년들을 성인들과 동일하게 처우하지 않기 위해 소년들에 대한 국가의 역할과 기능을 ʻ국친사상ʼ이라는 이념을 통해 정립해 놓고 있다. 이러한 이념적 가치를 소년법에 녹여놓은 이유는 소년들은 성인들에 비해 육체적․정신적으로 성숙하지 못했고, 개인의 잘못된 행위에 대해 빠른 반성이 이루어질 수 있기 때문이다. 특히, 소년법은 1958년 제정된 이후 소년들의 교화와 개선을 통한 사회복귀라는 목표아래 소년법이 담고 있는 사항적, 절차적 문제들을 해결해 나가기 위해 1963년, 1977년, 1988년, 2007년 등 총 4회에 걸쳐 개정이 이루어졌다. 그러나 소년범죄, 소년강력범죄가 줄어들지 않고 있고, 성인범죄와 비교해도 그 정도가 심각할 정도로 흉포해지고 잔인해져가는 경향을 보이는 것도 사실이다. 결과적으로 소년법 폐지 및 소년연령 인하를 주장하게 되는 이유이기도하다. 하지만 소년범죄 및 소년강력범죄를 해결하기 위한 방안으로서 소년법 폐지와 소년연령 인하가 유일한 대안이 될 수는 없다. 따라서 소년법이 담고 있는 소년보호주의의 기본적 틀 속에서 소년범죄 내지는 소년강력범죄를 해결할 수 있는 방안들이 마련되어야하고, 그 중 본 논문은 소년들이 행한 범죄행위들에 대해 내려지는 보호처분의 규범적․사실적 문제들을 찾아내 그에 대한 해결방안을 마련하는 것을 목표로 삼았다. 특히, 보호처분 중 6호 처분 즉, 아동복지법에 따른 아동복지시설이나 그 밖의 소년보호시설에 감호위탁 처분이 갖는 의미와 가치 그리고 소년법 내에서 6호 처분이 갖는 문제점을 살피고 이후 이에 대한 정책적 방안 제시에 중점을 두었다. 소년들은 단순히 처벌의 대상, 낙인의 대상이 되지 말아야한다. 한 국가의 시민으로서 올바르게 성장할 수 있도록 국가가 제도적 장치를 마련하고, 마련된 제도가 소년들의 재범방지를 위한 역할과 기능을 다할 수 있도록 다양한 인적․재정적 지원을 통해 소년보호처분이 제 역할을 다할 수 있도록 해야 할 것이다. The Juvenile Act is based on juvenile protectionism by being stated that it aims to help that juveniles grow soundly by doing necessary measures such as protective measures to adjust the environmental adjustment and correct behavior of juvenile offenders with anti-social behavior as well as special measures of criminal punishment on Article 1 of the Act. In addition, the Act establishes the role and function of government through the ‘Parens patriae(parent patriot)’ for juveniles in order to avoid treating them as adults in the criminal punishment. The reason why this ideological value is contanined in the Juvenile Act is because juveniles are less physically and mentally mature than adults and can quickly reflect on individual wrongdoings. In particular, the Juvenile Act, since its enactment in 1958, has been amended four times in 1963, 1977, 1988, and 2007 to resolve the substantive and procedural problems in the Act under the goal of having juvenile offenders go back to society through the edification and correction. However, it is also true that juvenile crimes and violent crimes are not decreasing, and that they tend to become more ferocious and cruel, even compared to adult crimes. As a result, this is also the reason of being claimed for the abolition of the Juvenile Act and lowering the age of juvenile protection in the Act. However, those claims cannot be the only way to solve juvenile crimes and violent crimes. Therefore, within the basic framework of juvenile protectionism contained in the Juvenile Act, measures must be prepared to solve juvenile crimes and violent crimes. This point of view, this study aims to find the solutions of the problems to juvenile protective disposition which has the normative and factual issues. In particular, it will find the meaning and value of disposal No. 6 that is protection disposition, entrusting custody to a child welfare facility or other juvenile protection facility under the Child Welfare Act, and the problems with disposal No. 6 in the Juvenile Act, furthemore, it will focus on presenting political measures to reduce the problems of disposal No. 6 in the Act Juveniles must not simply be objects of punishment or stigma. Government has to establish institutional system in other that juveniles can grow properly as citizens of the country. This institutional system should be able to make juvenile protection measures fulfill its role through human and financial support for preventing second conviction of juvenile offenders.

소년범죄자의 사회복귀지원에 관한 검토-일본 소년원법과 소년감별소법을 중심으로-

배상균 한국소년정책학회 2018 少年保護硏究 Vol.31 No.1

In recent years, juvenile offenses have been decreasing in Korea and Japan, but the recidivism rate is high enough to reach about 40%. The government of Japan is systematically advancing the preventing recidivism against juvenile offenders as the main policy task. In connection with this, in June 2014 the new Juvenile Training Schools Act (Act No. 58 of 2014) and the Juvenile Classification Homes Act (Act No. 59 of 2014) were enacted, and through this, we are promoting smooth social rehabilitation support to a juvenile. The preventing recidivism matters have been conducted under these new laws: For example, (i) to conduct assessment of juveniles based on professional knowledge and skills, (ii) to conduct observation and protection of juvenile committed to the homes for their sound development, and (iii) to provide support within the local community to prevent juvenile delinquency and crime. In this way, Japan has strengthened its treatment to support the smooth rehabilitation of juveniles through the establishment of the new Juvenile Training Schools Act and the Juvenile Classification Homes Act. Also, recent trends in juvenile policy in Japan are not only treatments that respect juvenile's intent and personality, but also, for the purpose of supporting smooth rehabilitation, securing housing for juveniles and finding employment. This is based on the result of investigating how securing of housing and finding employment affect the decline of the recidivism rate in juveniles. .

소년법의 연령과 형사책임

김혁(Kim Hyeok) 한국형사정책학회 2016 刑事政策 Vol.28 No.3

The concept of juvenile protection in the current Juvenile Act applies not only to juvenile protection cases but also to juvenile criminal cases, and the juvenile justice system has been developed in accordance with the problems of criminal responsibility age. In other words, it means that the juvenile protection ideology, which forms the basis of the Juvenile Act, has a nature that can not be discussed separately from the criminal responsibility. This is evidenced by the fact that measures for juvenile protection are criminal sanctions that restrict the basic rights of juveniles. Therefore, it is natural to think about the age problem of the Juvenile Act in connection with the problem of criminal responsibility, and through such a process, it becomes possible to understand rationally the various age regulations prescribed in Juvenile Act. In the protection cases, if the protective detention is introduced to improve rehabilitation of the age group with incomplete responsibility, it is logical whether a juvenile is the object of protective detention or not should be based on the age at the time of act as in the Criminal Act. In the criminal cases, for the same reason, the age standard of the indeterminate sentence and reduction of punishment should be judged by the time of act. The attempt to harmonize the juvenile and criminal laws in terms of criminal responsibility is not merely a slogan of the Juvenile Act aiming at healthy growth of the juveniles, but rather a way to refrain from excessive state intervention and guarantee the juveniles’ procedural rights.

현행 소년법의 문제점과 개선방안

장영민 ( Young Min Chang ),김구슬 ( Ku Seul Kim ) 이화여자대학교 법학연구소 2006 法學論集 Vol.10 No.1

This paper is to study some problems of the Korean Juvenile Act and tries to make some proposals for it`s improvement and modification. Nowadays there are some suggestions regarding age levels which the Act sets concerning juvenile delinquents according to the developmental stages juvenile offenders based on the way of trans formation from the classical aspiration of making children more educated and more adaptable to the society to a strategy of ``getting tough`` to the juvenile delinquents. And it is commonly noted that the Act has some weakness of achieving its goals, and the available measures it deploys have some procedural system of the Act: The juvenile court or criminal court to the prosecutors(the prosecutor initiative system). This way of intake of the Juvenile Act is largely criticized on the ground that the prosecutors are usually apt to think that punishment is more effective or suitable to the juvenile offenses which resulted in serious injuries than educational or other non-punitive treatments are. This paper proposes that the intake initiatives would rather be given to the juvenile court. The treatment measures that the Juvenile Act deploys have themselves some difficulties to meet the needs of efficacious treatments. The so-called code 1 measure which is to entrust the juvenile to the parents or other guardians who care the juvenile on behalf of the parents is evaluated as little effective, but if volunteer guardians are more likely to deployed and more available, the code 1 measure will be a more meaning ful way of treatment of the juvenile delinquents. The so-called code 2 measures, that is, the short- and long-term probations, are pointed out to be facing with chronic deficits of personnel and facilities. Intensive probations are also diagnosed as having the same difficulties. This paper considers it as a way of confronting with these difficulties to mobilize civil resources. The code 4 and 5 measure, entrusting the juvenile to the welfare institutions or hospitals, bear the same burdens. This paper proposes that government should have more institutions founded and worked by financial and other supports. As another way of facing with that difficulties, it is considered that the Juvenile Detention Center may be deployed as a surrogate welfare institutions before welfare facilities are ready enough. The code 6 and 7 measures, short- and long-term accommodation of the juvenile in the Juvenile Detention Center, have a problem that the Act permits the director of the Center to decide the duration of accommodation of the juvenile, especially in case of long-term one. This paper recommend that it be decided by a juvenile court. Another problem concerning the Juvenile Detention Venter accommodation is the fact that the organized, violent and recidivist juvenile are incarcerated with other juvenile who have better prognosis. For this case, the more deliberate and minute intake process is required with support of better investigation facilities.

「보호소년 등의 처우에 관한 법률」 제17차개정의 주요내용 및 평가

박찬걸 한국소년정책학회 2014 少年保護硏究 Vol.26 No.-

The 18th revision (Act No. 12190) of the Act of Treatment ofJuvenile Offenders, which can be considered as the corelegislation of juvenile justice of our country, was revised onJanuary 7, 2104 and enacted on June 8, 2014. The Act undergonea several revisions in the past since its 11th revision but untilthe 17th revision on July 30, 2013, they were mostly the revisionof other act or modification of wording. Accordingly, they hadnot caused a significant change in the juvenile justice policy. In the midst of such situation, the 17th revision of the Actthat was motioned by the government on August 14, 2012 andproclaimed on July 30, 2013 has a significant implication in itscontents since it presents a solution for a several issues ofjuvenile justice that had been pointed out. The Revision fills thelegislative vacuum between the Juvenile Act and the Act ofTreatment of Juvenile Offenders, which can be considered as thetwo major acts of juvenile justice policy, by comparativelyanalyzing their regulations. In addition, the Revision includesvarious measures to correspond with systemized consistencythrough cross-analysis with similar articles being defined in other acts such as the Act of Sentence Execution and InmatesTreatment, the Probation Act, Elementary and SecondaryEducation Act, Immigration Control Act and the Act of SchoolViolence Prevention and Measures. Accordingly, this paper will respectively review the legislativebackground and significance of the main contents of the 17threvision of the Act of Treatment of Juvenile Offenders andassess the contents. In addition, it will provide a suggestion ofurging legislative measure in the future for a several issues thatare not being reflected in the current act. 우리나라의 소년사법에 있어서 핵심법령이라고 할 수 있는 「보호소년 등의 처우에 관한 법률」(이하에서는 ‘보처법’이라고 한다)에대한 제18차 개정(법률 제12190호)1)이 지난 2014. 1. 7. 개정 및 2014. 6. 8. 시행되어 현재에 이르고 있다. 동법은 1958. 8. 7. 법률제493호로 제정된 「소년원법」에 기원을 두고 있는데, 당시 소년원법2)은 보호처분에 의하여 송치된 소년을 수용하여 이들에게 교정교육을 행하는 소년원에 대한 역할과 임무를 주로 규정하고 있었다. 이후 1988. 12. 31. 법률 4058호로 개정된 제3차 소년원법에서부터소년원과 소년감별소3)의 조직과 기능 기타 소년의 교정교육 등에관하여 필요한 사항을 규정함을 목적으로 하면서 조문의 개수도 기존의 20개에서 항목을 제6장으로 편제함과 동시에 총 53개의 조문으로 대폭 증설하면서4), 개정법 제53조(‘이 법의 시행에 관하여 필요한 사항은 대통령령으로 정한다’)에 의거하여 1989. 12. 22. 소년원법 시행령(대통령령 제12856호)이 제정되었으며, 1995. 1. 5. 법률제4929호로 개정된 제5차 소년원법에서는 소년감별소의 명칭5)이 소년분류심사원으로 변경되는 일부 개정이 있었다. 이후 법률 제8723호로 2007. 12. 21. 공포되어 2008. 6. 22.부터 시행된 제11차 개정6)에서는 소년원ㆍ소년분류심사원의 다양한 임무와 기능을 포괄할 수적으로 기탁하는 금품을 접수할 수 있다. ② 제1항에 따른 기부금품의 접수 절차 등에 관하여 필요한 사항은 대통령령으로 정한다.’라는 내용을 신설하였다. 2) 제정 당시의 소년원법은 본문 20개 조문, 부칙 3개 조문으로 구성되어 있었는데,당시 矯正院令을 대체하는 법률로 제정된 것이었다. 3) 1977. 12. 31. 법률 제3048호에 의한 제2차 개정 소년원법에서는 소년감별소를 신설하여 가위탁된 소년의 자질감별을 행하게 하고, 보호처분된 소년에 대하여 성행의 개선과 진보의 정도에 따라 단계적 처우를 실시하여 조사심리와 교정의 성과를 높이는 등 소년보호에 만전을 기하는 것을 주된 목적으로 하고 있는데, 이는 1977. 4. 30. 서울소년감별소가 신설된 것을 계기로 개정된 것이라고 볼 수있다. 4) 제3차 개정은 소년원 및 소년감별소의 교육․보호기능을 다양하게 확대하고, 보호소년등의 권익신장과 처우의 개선을 도모하며, 보호관찰법의 제정과 소년법의개정에 따라 관련사항 및 관계조문을 정비하려는 것을 목적으로 이루어졌다. 5) 제5차 개정은 기관명칭인 ‘소년감별소’의 ‘감별’이란 용어가 일반적으로 동물의암수, 예술품의 진위를 가린다는 의미로 인식되고 있어 기관명칭으로 사용하기에는 적합하지 않다는 의견이 많아 이를 개정하려는 것을 목적으로 이루어졌다. 6) 국회법률지식정보시스템에 의하면 2007. 12. 21. 개정된 보처법을 제정 보처법이라고 칭하지 있도록 법률 제명을 기존의 소년원법에서 보처법으로 변경하고7),보호소년 등의 인권보장을 강화하며, 비행소년에 대한 교정교육 및재범방지 기능을 강화하기 위한 법적ㆍ제도적 기반을 구축하는 한편, 소년사법체제 개선을 위한 당시의 소년법 개정 추진과 연계하여관련 규정을 정비하였다. 보처법은 제11차 개정 이후에도 몇 차례의 개정을 더 거치지만,2013. 7. 30.에 단행된 제17차 개정 이전까지는 대체로 타법개정이거나 단일 조문의 자구수정 등에 그치는 등으로 말미암아 소년사법정책의 큰 변화를 초래한 것은 없는 실정이었다. 그러던 중에 정부가2012. 8. 14. 발 ...

제20대 국회에 제출된 소년법 개정법률안에 대한 검토 : 제재강화에 대한 비판을 중심으로

박찬걸(Park Chan-Geol) 한국형사정책학회 2020 刑事政策 Vol.32 No.2

1958. 7. 24. 제정된 소년법은 그 동안 총 11차례의 개정을 거치면서 현재에 이르고 있다. 제20대 국회에서는 총 42건의 소년법 일부개정법률안이 제출되어 이 가운데 단 1건만이 국회를 통과하였는데, 이 마저도 제67조에 대한 헌법재판소의 헌법불합치결정의 취지를 반영한 것에 불과하고, 나머지 41건의 법안은 모두 임기만료로 자동폐기되어 버렸다. 현행 소년법 정책의 문제점을 파악하고 개선방안을 모색하는 논의의 장은 입법의 영역으로 귀결된다고 해도 과언이 아니라고 할 수 있는데, 그중에서도 최근 국회에 상정되고 있는 소년법 일부개정법률안의 제안배경, 내용, 기존 법령과의 차이, 다른 법령과의 관계 등을 파악하는 것은 우리나라 소년법 정책의현 주소와 미래를 음미해 보는 가장 좋은 방법이라고 생각한다. 이러한 측면에서 제21대 국회의 임기가 이제 막 시작된 상황에서 제20대 국회에 계류하였던 총 42건의소년법 일부개정법률안을 전수조사하여 구체적으로 재음미하는 것은 비교적 최근의 소년법 정책에 대한 큰 흐름을 이해하는데 있어 상당한 도움이 될 것으로 기대된다. 이에 본고에서는 특정 범죄에 대한 소년법의 적용 배제, 촉법소년 상한연령의 하향 조정, 범죄소년 상한연령의 하향 조정, 사형 및 무기형 특례규정의 정비, 부정기형의 정비, 가석방 특례규정의 정비, 자격제한 특례규정의 정비 등을 중심으로 소년범에 대한 형사처벌의 강화와 관련된 개정안의 내용을 살펴 본 다음(Ⅱ), 구속영장제한적 발부 규정 삭제, 촉법소년에 대한 임시위탁영장 발부, 형사법원으로의 재이송사유 추가, 심리기일에 보호자의 필수적 소환 등을 중심으로 소년사법 처리절차의강화 관련 내용을 분석하며(Ⅲ), 이후 소년원 송치기간의 연장, 사회봉사명령 부과연령의 하향조정, 수강명령 부과연령의 하향조정, 보호처분 병합의 추가, 우범소년의 범위 확대 등을 중심으로 한 보호처분의 강화와 관련된 검토(Ⅳ)를 차례대로 진행하기로 한다. Enacted on July 24, 1958, the Juvenile Act have went through 11 times of revision so far. In the 20th National Assembly, total 42 cases of partially-revised legislative bill of the Juvenile Act were submitted and only 1 of the cases passed through Parliament, and the case was merely a reflection of the intent of the decision of constitutional nonconformity of the Constitutional Court for the Article 67, and the rest 41 bills were all discarded automatically due to the expiration. It is not too much to say that a forum for understanding problems of current juvenile act and seeking an improvement lead toward the area of legislation, and among others, understanding of the background, contents of proposing a partially-revised legislative bill of the Juvenile Act that has recently been presented to the National Assembly, difference with existing laws and relation to the other laws is considered the best way to examine the present state and the future of our Juvenile Act. In this respect, reexamination of 42 cases of partially-revised legislative bill of the Juvenile Act which were pending in the 20th National Assembly concretely by carrying out a complete enumeration survey in the situation when the term of the 21st National Assembly has just begun is expected to be of a great help to understanding of the great flow of the relatively recent policy on the juvenile act. Thus, this thesis aims to examine contents of revised bill related to intensification of criminal penalty against juvenile delinquents focusing on the exclusion of application of the Juvenile Act to specific crimes, lowering of the age of juvenile offenders, improvement of exceptional cases for death penalty, life imprisonment, indeterminate sentence, conditional release, restrictions on qualification etc. and will make an analysis on the details related to the enhancement of juvenile jurisprudence procedure focusing on the deletion of limited issuance of arrest warrant, consigned issuance of temporary warrant against law-intruding juveniles, add of the reason for retransfer to the criminal court, shortening of the time of execution of the general prisons, and will continue examination related to enhancement of protective disposition giving priority to the extension of the term of sending to juvenile reformatory, downward adjustment of the age for imposition of social service order, imposition of order to attend a lecture, addition of protective disposition for concurrent crimes, expansion of the range of pre-delinquents etc.

2021년 일본 소년법 개정에 대한 검토 - 18·19세 소년(특정소년)의 새로운 처분을 중심으로 -

손여옥 ( Son Yeo-ok ) 한국소년정책학회 2021 少年保護硏究 Vol.34 No.2

On March 2021, the bill for partly amending the Juvenile Act was submitted to the National Assembly. It was formed as it is on May 21, 2021 and will be implemented from April 1, 2022. The Juvenile Act and Criminal Act Subcommittee (for Juvenile Age and Offenders Treatment) of the Judiciary Committee has paid attention to the fact that 18 and 19 years old youths have the right to vote as a result of the amendment to the Public Office Election Act and they are treated as adults from 2022 as a result of the amendment to the Civil Act, and considered lowering the age at which the Juvenile Act is applicable. The amendments that have been completed through long discussions define 18 and 19 years old youths as “Specific Juveniles” and treat them different from persons under the age of 18 by making an exception. In other words, although 18 and 19 years youths still cannot be considered full-grown youths, they are beings expected to participate in the society with responsibilities having the right to vote and, therefore, they are defined as intermediate persons between juveniles and adults. The basic framework of the current Juvenile Act un which all cases are forwarded to family courts and probation is determined by conducting investigations and rendering a judgment, remains effective as to specific juveniles. As a result of these amendments, however, as for 18 and 19 years old youths, the scope of the so-called “referral to public prosecutor in principle” extends to the offenses punishable by imprisonment with or without forced labor for a short term of one (1) year. Moreover, the provision defining juveniles likely to commit a crime in the future is not applicable (as an exception for probation). The exception of report prohibition is applicable after indictment. If a suspect is forwarded to the prosecution and then, is subject to criminal judgment, an indefinite term of sentence does not apply and the exception of restrictions on qualifications does not apply as well (which means that they are subject to the same disposition as adults in principle). Those provisions are exceptions different from the provisions for persons under the age of 18. The discussion about specific juveniles are also a discussion about legal bases under juveniles should be defined under the Juvenile Act. Furthermore, the exceptions for specific juveniles open a couple of doors to rehabilitate 18 and 19 years old youths and, in certain cases, to hold them strictly responsible for the offenses they have committed. Taking into serious consideration whether relevant principles and exceptions under the Juvenile Act can possibly coexist, should of great help to establish directions and juvenile policies of the Juvenile Act in the future.

소년법 개정논의에 대한 고찰

박호현 ( Park Ho-hyun ) 영남대학교 법학연구소 2017 영남법학 Vol.0 No.44

소년법은 제1조에서 반(反)사회성이 있는 소년의 환경 조정과 품행 교정을 위한 보호처분 등의 필요한 조치를 취하고, 형사처분에 관한 특별조치를 이행함으로써 소년이 건전하게 성장하도록 돕는 것을 그 목적으로 한다고 명시하고 있다. 이는 소년법이 보호주의에 기본적 바탕을 두고 있음을 알 수 있다. 소년법은 1958년 제정된 이후 1963년, 1977년, 1988년 3차례에 걸쳐 개정이 이루어졌다. 하지만 소년법이 가지고 있는 근본적 문제점 및 그에 대한 해결방안을 모색하지는 못하였다. 따라서 2007년 개정된 소년법은 소년보호처분의 문제점을 보완하는 역할을 했다고 볼 수 있다. 특히, 소년법 제32조 제1항 보호처분 종류를 7종류에서 10종류로 늘렸을 뿐만 아니라, 소년법 제32조의2에서 대안교육, 상담명령, 외출제한명령, 보호자에 대한 특별교육명령 등을 보호관찰의 부가처분으로 명시하였다. 이러한 내용들은 보호관찰을 통해 소년의 인격과 환경을 효과적으로 개선할 수 있는 집중보호관찰 프로그램 등으로 소년의 품행개선을 담보하는 내용들이다. 또한 소년법은 소년원 송치처분에서 1개월 이내의 소년원 송치처분(8호 처분)과 단기소년원 송치처분(9호 처분) 및 장기소년원 송치처분(10호 처분)의 3종류를 두고 있다. 하지만 2007년 소년법 개정도 기존의 소년법이 가지고 있는 문제점들을 모두 해결했다고 볼 수는 없다. 따라서 본 논문은 2015년 이후에 발의된 소년법 개정법률안들을 중심으로 개정법률안이 담고 있는 문제점을 분석하여 그에 대한 해결방안을 모색하는 근본적 토대로 삼으려고 한다. The juvenile act(below, the act) takes necessary steps like security measures to get antisocial juvenile correct their behaviors, is stated that it has the purpose to help juvenile grow up soundly by implementing special measures related in criminal punishment. It is seen as the act is based on protectionism. The act has got through 3 times revisions in 1963, 1977, and 1988 after 1958 when legalized. However the fundamental problems of the act were still left, and the solutions were not found yet. When the act was revised in 2007, the problem of juvenile security measures is compensated. Especially not only the kinds of security measures became 10 kinds from 7 kinds on para. 1 of art. 32 of the act, but also disposition of imposition of security measures is stated as alternative education, counseling order, curfew oder, special education order to parents on 2 of art. 32 of the act. These contents is heading toward ensuring juvenile`s behavior correction through the intensive program that improves juvenile`s personality and environment effectively on security measures. Additionally the act has 3 imposition kinds of sending until 1 month (line 8 of disposition), of short-term sending(line 9 of disposition), of long-term sending(line 10 of disposition). Nonetheless all the problems of the act has not been solved yet, even through revision of the act in 2007. Thus this study will seek the problems of the revised act comparing the propositions of the act that proposed since 2015, and will be used as foundation of finding solutions of them.