리메이크 영화 『방황하는 칼날』에서 나타난 소년법 인식의 비교 고찰

남상현 ( Nam Sang-hyon ) 한양대학교 동아시아문화연구소 2017 동아시아 문화연구 Vol.71 No.-

As the juvenile crime occurs, the discourse on the Juvenile Law goes hand in hand. The different discourse between Korea and Japan on the juvenile crime case forms the different awareness between juvenile crime and juvenile law. Based on these differences, In this paper, I compared Korean and Japanese film about the differences in the public perception on the juvenile law and the points which they wanted to focus more on. Through this comparative study, this paper aims to understand the difference of perception between juvenile crime and juvenile law in Korea and Japan. Hence, I analyzed the remake films of Korea (2014) and Japan (2009), after analyzing Higashino Keigo's novel Samayou Yaiba published in 2004. First, in the Japanese movie, it focused on the deprivation of the victim 's family and the anger because of the limitation of the juvenile law, which fails to punish the juvenile offenders. The characters were more objective and deeply concerned about the juvenile law. Through this, the movie has achieved the role of giving the public an opportunity to think and review about the juvenile law. On the other hand, in the korea movie, it reduce the content about the juvenile law and maximize the psychology of the character. A father in a Korean movie is transformed into an ignorant person in the juvenile law. Furthermore, he pledges revenge because of the anger which belongs from that he was not able to protect the beloved daughter. From the father representing the public, there could not find the awareness of the juvenile law. However, only the police had a awareness of problem in the juvenile law. As a result of comparing the difference of recognition about the juvenile law appearing in the two films, it is found that the Japanese film is based on the fact that the public knows the juvenile law in detail, and at the same time, it tends to show the distrust of juvenile law. On the other hand, Korea focused on the victim 's feelings rather than juvenile laws. Nevertheless, it showed faith in the judiciary and the will to change and expected positive changes in the future. In this paper, the difference of perception of the juvenile law was grasped in depth by comparing and analyzing movies of both countries. This implies that it was possible to consider the sociality of movies and novels.

영유아‧아동‧청소년에 관한 근본법제의 검토방향 -정부조직법 개편에 즈음하여 청소년계의 입장에서-

조영승 한국청소년학회 2008 청소년학연구 Vol.15 No.4

Because of the uniting of government support organization for the infant, the juvenile and the youth, the individual policy is more likely to integrate, this leads to the discussion of combining amendment of the each fundamental law. Independently the youth world should think the method that the youth fostering can be activated without spoiling each essence of the support. When examining the direction on combining amendment of the fundamental laws on the infant, the juvenile and the youth, we should pay regard to the implication for the term of them rather than make the fundamental law fit united government support organization. If we integrate infant caring laws, juvenile welfare laws and youth fostering laws with implicational value of this term, we should make new basic law based on the identities of human development support until a fetus become an adult. We can concept the name of the law as Youth Basic Act which follows constitutional principles or Human Development Support Basic Act which pays regard to human development support. In this new basic law, we delete Youth Fostering and then create the definition on Youth Support(if its name is Youth Basic Act) or Human Development Support(if its name is Human Development Support Basic Act), that comprises infant caring, juvenile welfare, and youth activity. This would be the essence of the support which comprises infant caring, juvenile welfare and youth activity by the new basic law. Also we create definition of infant caring, juvenile welfare and youth activity as subordination of youth support or human development support, as origin of infant caring law, juvenile welfare law and youth activity encouragement law. To examine fundamental laws on infant, juvenile and youth like this way, it is important that we should unveil the identity of youth fostering, which is regulated on youth fostering system and readjust the identity by exposing present situation. After analysing and clarifying the present situation of youth fostering system, we have to make new youth system which is composed of youth fostering corrected above, infant caring and juvenile welfare. The integration of the fundamental laws by creating new basic law and improving related laws is profound work influencing on a far-sighted national policy. So the combining amendment of the fundamental laws should be progressed by the leader of infant, juvenile and youth according to the constitutional principles that a people makes the law. 영유아‧아동‧청소년의 정부지원기구통합으로 각기 분립되어 있던 정책이 하나로 종합될 가능성이 커졌고, 이는 각 근본법제의 통합 개정 논의로 이어졌다. 청소년계는 주체적으로 각각의 지원본질이 훼손되지 않으면서 청소년육성도 활성화 될 수 있는 방안을 탐구해야 한다. 영유아‧아동‧청소년에 관한 근본법제의 방향 검토 시 통합된 정부지원기구에 근본법제를 맞추어서는 안 되고 영유아‧아동‧청소년이라는 제도용어가 가지는 함의를 존중하여야 한다. 이 용어의 제도적 함의를 존중하여 영유아보육법제‧아동복지법제‧청소년육성법제를 통합하려면, 태아가 사회적 성인이 될 때까지의 인간발달지원이라는 동질성에 바탕을 두고 새로운 기본법을 제정하여야 한다. 그 법명은 헌법 규정 취지를 좇는 청소년기본법 또는 인간발달지원에 착안한 인간발달지원기본법으로 구상할 수 있다. 새 기본법에서는 청소년육성의 개념을 삭제하고 영유아보육‧아동복지‧청소년활동을 포괄하는, 청소년지원(법명 청소년기본법의 경우) 또는 인간발달지원(법명 인간발달지원기본법의 경우)의 정의조항을 신설한다. 이것이 바로 새 기본법이 정하는 영유아보육‧아동복지‧청소년활동을 포괄하는 지원의 본질이 된다. 또한 청소년지원 또는 인간발달지원의 하위개념으로 영유아보육‧아동복지‧청소년활동의 정의조항을 신설하여 영유아보육법, 아동복지법, 청소년활동진흥법의 근원으로 한다. 영유아‧아동‧청소년의 근본법제가 위와 같은 방향에서 검토되려면, 청소년육성제도가 규정하고 있는 청소년육성의 정체성을 밝힌 후, 현 실태를 그대로 드러내어 정체성을 새롭게 정리하는 것이 중요하다. 청소년육성제도의 현 실태를 분석‧규명한 후에, 위에서 정립된 청소년육성, 영유아보육 및 아동복지가 융합된 새로운 청소년제도를 만들어야 한다. 새로운 기본법을 만들고 관련 법률들을 정비하여 하나의 근본법제로 통합하는 것은 국가백년대계에 영향을 주는 심오한 작업이다. 이렇듯 중요한 근본법제의 변경은 국민이 스스로 법을 만든다는 헌법 정신에 따라 국민 즉, 영유아‧아동‧청소년의 지도자가 중심이 되어 진행되어야 한다. 그리하여 우리나라는 조화로운 인간발달을 지원하는 통합된 법제와 이를 수행하는 독립 정부부처를 가진 나라로 발전되어야 한다.

소년의 형사연령에 관한 고찰

박영규 한국소년정책학회 2016 소년보호연구 Vol.29 No.2

This study is Lowering the Juvenile Age Requirement of the Criminal Responsibility, especially The Relation between Determining the Age of Criminal Minor in Criminal Law and the System of Protective Disposition of Juvenile Offenders in Juvenile Law. The Age of criminal minor in current criminal law should be reviewed to be lowered due to the age, getting more outrageous of juvenile crime. The Criminal Law and the Juvenile Law surpasses the old and past one, both in the protection of Juvenile Rights and the improvement of correctional treatment. The current Criminal Law and Juvenile Law has been revised several times for the purpose of strengthening the ability of adaptation to a society for Juveniles. To resolve the conflicts between the idea that Juveniles have their consitutional rights and the reality that basic rights of Juveniles could be confined as necessary, we should discuss more concretely about the scopes and ranges of juvenile rights. This study will provide us with useful knowledge theoretically and empirically, especially to the Juvenile Age Requirement of the juvenile protection cases. An argument to lower the criminal liability age is appeared as one of measures to strongly counteract the school violence committed by elementary students or low grade of middle school students. A bill lowering the minimum age of criminal liability for a child offender from 14 to 12 years of age was filed at the House of Representatives. The Korean Juvenile Law was already revised because of cruel juvenile crimes by younger juveniles in December 2007. This motion just emphasizes on protecting the children who are 10 to 13 years old, at the committing crime. Korean Criminal Law cannot punish the children and cannot protect the victims without lowering the minimum age of criminal liability for a child offender. Juveniles should be the target of protection rather than punishment even if they commit a crime, because they are an immature being and are easy to be influenced by environment. The lowering of the age of juvenile is not the best one of effective measures according to characteristics of the recent juvenile crimes, but to consider the measures to diversify and vitalize the protective disposition system for juvenile offenders in educational aspects which seems to be more suitable. Study on the Age of Juveniles is to ensure sound fostering of juveniles by carrying out necessary measures, such as protective dispositions, etc. for the environmental adjustment and character correction of juveniles anti-social behavior, and by providing special measures regarding criminal dispositions. In conclusion, this research will be a study for the new way of correctional treatment to Juveniles to improve considerably. The traditional ideas of The current Juvenile Law and Criminal Law should be modified by the constitutional principles named the so - called juvenile justice. The Juvenile Law and Criminal Law should be consistent with the constitution and the theory of constitutional juvenile justice. In relation to practical problems and reformative approaches in juvenile justice processing, we need attention to The Relation between Determining the Age of juvenile in The Juvenile Act and the System of Protective Disposition of Juvenile Offenders in Juvenile Law. Kew 「14세가 되지 아니한 자」의 행위는 현행「형법」에서 불가벌로규정하고 있다.1) 이러한 「14세가 되지 아니한 자」는 형사미성년자라고 한다. 형사미성년자는 집단 폭행 및 방화 등의 중범죄를 저지른 경우에도소년법에 의한 보호처분의 대상이 될 뿐 형사상 처벌대상이 되지 않는다.2) 형법상 형사미성년자의 불가벌에 대해서는 견해가 대립하고 있다. 먼저 형사미성년자에게는 범죄에 상응한 형벌이 과하여지지 않는다는 사실은 불합리하다는 주장이 제기되고 있다. 더구나 형사미성년자의 범죄가 다양화․흉포화함에 따라 형사미성년자의 연령을 하향조정하는 것이 범죄예방 측면이나 국민의 법감정에 부합한다는 견해가 강력히 제기되고 있다.3) 반면 형사미성년자의 연령을 하향 조정함은 형사처벌이 확대되고형사미성년자에 대하여 보호적·교육적 측면에서 교화할 수 있는 기회가 박탈된다는 반론이 제기되고 있다. 현행 형법은 「14세 미만의 자」는 지적․도덕적 또는 성격적인 발육상태와는 별도로「사물의 변별능력」과 그 변별에 따른「행동 통제능력」이 없기 때문에「불법행위에 대한 비난가능성」이 없다고판단하여 형사책임능력을 부정하고 있다. 다만, 형사미성년자의 범죄행위는 책임능력을 전제로 한 형벌을배제할 뿐, 소년법에 의한 보호처분까지 배제하는 것은 아니다.4) 즉소년법은 형사미성년자인 경우에도「형벌법령에 저촉되는 행위를한 10세 이상 14세 미만의 소년」을 촉법소년으로 규정하고(소년법제4조 제1항 제2호), 형사책임능력을 전제로 하지 않는 보호처분이가능하도록 하고 있다(소년법 제32조). 여기서 보호처분은 형벌이 아니므로 그 요건으로 보호필요성, 즉교정가능성이 요구된다.5) 아무튼 그동안 소년범죄의 저연령화․흉포화․재범율 증가 등으로인하여 현행 형법상 형사(미성년자) 연령이 재설정되어야 하는 것이 아닌가에 대한 문제가 줄기차게 제기되어 왔다.

일본소년법 적용연령(상한기준) 인하에 대한 일본 학계의 반대성명과 시사점

안성훈 ( Sunghoon Ahn ) 한국소년정책학회 2018 소년보호연구 Vol.31 No.3

In June 2015, Japan enabled people above the age of 18 to vote while they had age over 20 could before, by legal establishment of 「Partial Amendment to Public Official Election Act」. This act regulates to take necessary legislative measures by reviewing civil law(1896, article 89), juvenile law(1948, article 168), and other legislation’s regulation according to the article 11 of the supplementary provision. And so, Ministry of Justice(Japan) submitted Civil Law Amendment, which includes lowering the age requirement of adult hood by under 20 to under 18, to a National Assembly, which then passed by the House of Representatives in March 13, 2018 waiting to be enforced, and actively reviewing juvenile law to be applied under the age of 18 rather than 20. Discussion related to the amendment of juvenile law is always been raised after the serious incident by a juvenile. They say that lowering the age of being an adult hood that relates to the juvenile law is due to the submitting of Public Official Election Act to National Assembly. But in fact, incident of murdering first year middle school boy by some 18 year olds that occurred in Kawasaki(川崎) is the real reason. Whenever such serious juvenile incidents occur, medias are continually raising opinions that juvenile law is unfit to present situations, and they strongly insist to amend juvenile law. However, 114 Japan researchers of criminal law and juvenile law announced “Statement of Criminal Law Researcher’s Oppositions to the Proposal of Lowering the Limit of Application Regarding the Juvenile Law”(少年法適用対象年齢の引下げに反対する刑事法研究者の声明) to strongly oppose lowering the limit of application in juvenile law. Recent arguments about amendment and disposal of juvenile law in South Korea is, as it's mentioned earlier in introduction, related to a incidents of serious crime by juvenile. This paper handles with examinations of main basis of arguments and opinions about Japan academia’s opposition statement, and implications regarding South Korea’s disposal and amendment of juvenile law.

일본 소년법의 개정과정에 관한 고찰

박종순 ( Park Jong Soon ) 서울지방변호사회 2019 변호사 Vol.51 No.0

From 2017 until now, there have been many brutal incidents such as murders by teenagers in Korea. Because of this, public opinion to abolish or revise the juvenile law which has been lenient to the teenagers, is dominant. Those who insist on the abolishment or revision of the Juvenile Act argue that the purpose of criminal punishment is to defend society from crimes and the juvenile delinquency is becoming increasingly cruel. On the other hand, those who oppose the abolition of the Juvenile Law argue that extreme measures such as the abolition of the Juvenile Law could do more harm than good, and should be more carefully approached with the reconsideration of the ideology of the juvenile law. In Japan, however, since the late 1990s, public opinion to revise the juvenile law became predominant with the criticism on the lenient punishment of the juvenile law, when a abusive and brutal crimes of teenagers continued to arise. Consequently, the Juvenile act was partially amended in 2000, and then three(3) additional revisions were made until 2014. Although there are other opinions, it seems that the Japanese Juvenile law turned towards the direction of severe punishment for juvenile crimes and juvenile trials became more alike the criminal trial. Meanwhile, the South Korean public's demand for severe punishment of juvenile crimes is similar to the what occurred during the revision of Japanese Juvenile Law in 2000. Even though the argument for abolishing juvenile law has not been subsided, it is likely that a revision, rather than abolition of the law, will take place considering the ideology of the juvenile law. Therefore, it is meaningful to see in what ground that the revision of juvenile law took place, and what was discussed and criticized in Japan. This is because it will be something to be taken into reference when we discuss about abolishing or revising Korean Juvenile law in the future.

촉법소년의 연령 하향

점승헌 사단법인 한국법이론실무학회 2022 법률실무연구 Vol.10 No.3

The public's shock and concern are increasing very much about a series of juvenile delinquencies that have occurred recently. A juvenile’s mental immaturity in comparison with physical development leads to lacking emotional control, being apt to commit impulsive crimes, and showing a tendency to be easily tempted by the surroundings. A reason that the issue of lowering the age of law-intruding juveniles among young offenders continues to emerge is because of a rapid rise in law-intruding juveniles. In accordance with the statistics by the National Police Agency and by the court of law, the law-intruding juveniles have been increasing every year for the last five years. Most of the law-intruding juveniles were 13 years old. They were analyzed to be 72.7% of the total law-intruding juveniles. Hence, the discussions about the age of law-intruding juveniles are being made. The National Assembly is also being proposed the amendments of the Juvenile Law and Criminal Law. Even the government came forward the preparatory work of lowering the age of law-intruding juveniles. The downgrade in the age of law-intruding juveniles is what reduces its scope by dropping the age limit for the criminal minors from 14 to 12. However, whether the lower limit of criminal sanctions, which may have an absolute influence upon juveniles’ life, will be set at what age corresponds to an area where the the self-responsibility principle and the protectionism are mixed. There is also a criticism as saying that the ideology of protectionism should be applied even to the criminal procedure as well as to the juvenile protection procedure. Nevertheless, if juveniles who committed a violent crime are not punished properly just because of being young, this could be rather aiding and abetting a crime. It might be the result of driving them down a worse path. Moreover, what raises the alarm by strictly enforcing the standard of the law against criminals who repeatedly commit violent crimes by exploiting the fact that they are juvenile perpetrators could be a way to reduce a crime even a little. It will be below examined the low age pattern and the ferocity phenomenon in law-intruding juveniles, the problem about which the law-intruding juveniles themselves are unconscious or abuse the criminality, and the issue of criteria for judging the liability incompetence. And after looking into the revised bill that is being proposed by the National Assembly, there will be a consideration on the issues that will need to be contemplated when coming to lower the age of law-intruding juveniles. The human rights of the perpetrators are important as well. But the law should protect the victim before that. A crime is thought to be likely declined given coming to be settled as the social norm the perception that committing a crime leads to being punished reasonably regardless of age. 소년범 중 촉법소년의 연령 하향 문제가 지속적으로 대두되는 이유는 촉법소년이 급증하고 있기 때문이다. 경찰청과 법원 통계에 의하면 최근 5년간 해마다 증가하고 있으며, 촉법소년 가운데 대부분이 13세로 전체 촉법소년의 72.7%로 분석되었다. 이에 따라 촉법소년 연령에 관한 논의들이 이루어지고 있으며, 국회에서도 소년법 및 형법 개정법률안들이 발의되고 있다. 정부에서도 촉법소년의 연령을 낮추는 준비작업에 나섰다. 촉법소년의 연령하향은 형사미성년자 연령 상한선을 14세에서 12세로 낮춰 그 범위를 축소하는 것이다. 그러나 소년의 인생에 절대적인 영향을 미칠 수 있는 형사제재의 하한을 몇 살로 할 것인지의 여부는 책임주의 원칙과 보호주의가 교차하는 영역으로 보호주의의 이념은 소년보호절차 뿐만 아니라 형사절차에도 적용되어야 한다는 비판도 있다. 하지만 강력범죄를 저지른 촉법소년을 나이가 어리다는 이유만으로 제대로 된 처벌이 이루어지지 않는다면 이는 오히려 범죄를 방조하는 것이 될 수도 있으며, 그들을 더 나쁜 길로 내모는 결과가 될 수도 있다. 또한 촉법소년이라는 점을 악용해 반복적으로 강력범죄를 저지르는 범죄자들에 대해서는 법의 잣대를 엄정하게 들이댐으로써 경각심을 일깨워 주는 것이 범죄를 조금이나마 줄일 수 있는 한 방편이 될 수도 있을 것이다. 따라서 촉법소년의 연령을 10세 이상 12세 미만으로 하고, 촉법소년 모두를 일률적으로 처벌하는 것이 아니라 촉법소년 중 중범죄를 범한 자에게는 성인범과 마찬가지의 처벌 아니면 이와 유사한 처벌을 받도록 하여야 한다. 또한 이와 연계하여 형사미성년자의 연령을 하향하는 방안도 심도 있게 검토되어야 할 것이다. 범죄를 범하였으면 연령에 관계없이 반드시 그에 합당한 처벌을 받는다는 인식이 사회적 규범으로 정착하게 되면 범죄는 감소하게 될 것이라 생각한다.

교정 패러다임의 변화에 관한 소고

한영선,박지영 아시아교정포럼 2019 교정담론 Vol.13 No.3

소년범죄에 대한 우려가 높아지면서 한국사회는 소년범죄자에게 엄격한 처벌을 내리고 처벌 하한연령을 낮추거나 심지어 소년법의 폐지를 주장하는 목소리가 커지고 있다. 비록 소년의 성폭력 범죄나 재산범죄가 증가하고 있지만, 한편으로 소년범죄의 누범비율이 오히려 감소추세를 보인다는 점 등을 간과하여서는 안 된다. 더구나 소년범죄에 대한 엄벌화 경향은 현 소년사법의 근간이 되는 '소년보호' 기본이념에 부합하지 않다. 또한 2007년 소년법 개정과 함께 변경된 소년법의 목적을 고려할 때에도 소년범에 대한 엄벌화는 타당하지 않다. 2007년의 소년법 개정은 거의 전면 개정이라고 할 수 있을 정도로 많은 변화가 있었다. 2007년 소년법 개정에 관한 많은 연구들이 있었고, 국회에 제출된 개정 관련 서류에서도 개정이유에 대한 내용을 찾아볼 수 있었다. 하지만 소년사법 전반에 있어 소년법 목적 조항의 역할이 중요함에도 불구하고, 개정 소년법 제1조, 목적 조항이 변경된 이유를 명확하게 제시한 서류나 연구는 찾아보기 힘들었다. 이러한 의문점을 가지고 본 연구에서는 개정 전후의 소년법 목적 조항을 비교하여 개정된 목적의 중요성을 강조하고자 하였다. 또한 법원행정처와 한국소년법학회에서 제시하는 몇 가지 원칙과 관련 자료를 검토하여 연구자가 개정 소년법에 부합하다고 생각하는 5가지 원칙을 정리해 다음과 같이 제시하였다: (1) 비행소년 이익 최우선의 원칙, (2) 회복적 정의 원칙, (3) 타기관과의 협력주의, (4) 소년과의 대등적 파트너십, (5) 과학주의 및 개별처우. Since juvenile crime attracts much attention, Korean society is demanding to give severe punishment to juvenile criminals, to lower the age of punishment, and even asking to abolish the Juvenile Law. While sexual crime and property crime is still increasing, we cannot ignore the fact that the overall repeated-crime rate of the juvenile is gradually decreasing. Furthermore, severe punishment is directly against basic ideology for both juvenile protection and the justice system. Moreover, the Purpose of current Korean Juvenile Law (KJL2007), revised in 2007, is far from the tendency of severe punishment. There were many changes when the 2007 revision was made. Official documents submitted to the National Assembly and many studies do exist to explain the reason why the 2007 revision was conducted. In spite of the importance of purpose, ironically, none of them tried to identify why the first item (purpose) of the KJL2007 had changed. Start from the question, this study reviewed the purposes of juvenile law(pre-revision and revision) to emphasize the importance. Also, suggested upgraded principles following the KJL2007 based on literature reviews. As a short introduction, the biggest one among the changes in the KJL2007 was the way to understand ‘juvenile’. In the pre-revision law, the purpose of juvenile law focuses on “nurturing” of juveniles by state. In this point of view, a juvenile is just passive and dependent being. And the role of state was authoritative. Compared to this, in one of the revised KJL2007, each juvenile has an independence to choose and to be developed themselves. As the way of understanding juveniles changed, the relationship between the state and the juvenile had also changed, from vertical to horizontal. In spite of such changes, the Korean Justice System of Juvenile still has principles based on the old purpose of juvenile law. With researching and several reviews, this study suggested 8 upgraded principles following the changes : Principle of (1) Profit of Children is the first priority from the Convention on the Right of the Child (Article 3rd) (2) Restorative Justice, (3) Partnership with Equality, (4) Cooperation among the related agencies, (5) Scientism and Individualization of Treatment.

소년 위법행위자의 연령에 관한 몇 가지 소고

이용식 ( Yong-sik Lee ) 한국소년정책학회 2017 소년보호연구 Vol.30 No.3

Violent juvenile crime is emerging in diverse media. Juveniles are treated specially in criminal proceedings due to their age. Therefore, this thesis subjects to different issues related to the age of the perpetrators. The criminal law stipulates that people under the age of 14 are exempt from criminal punishment. It follows the biological standard in order to define “the age 14”. While the rules of the criminal law are fully concerned, the age 14 should be considered as the age 14 in the global counting system, not in the Korean system. Moreover, the birth date should be included when it is counted. The Criminal law, the juvenile law, and the juvenile protection act all take the age of the perpetrator as important criteria of punishment. Juvenile in juvenile law and that of juvenile protection act are defined differently. This is because each law takes different properties as the core of their rule. It is inevitable, yet it could confuse the general public so it is appropriate to consider revising legislation in a long term. Juvenile law divided the age of juveniles into several stages: over 14, between 10 to 13 years old, over 10. Special laws apply to a juvenile in criminal proceedings. For example, the death penalty or the lifetime imprisonment cannot be sentenced to a juvenile. Without any specific regulation, the threshold to decide the age of a juvenile could be an issue.There is a view that the age was set when the law-breaking was committed, on the other hand, the other views that it is when the judgment was made. Supreme court takes the latter. However, it is hardly agreeable since it could bring unreasonable consequences to the juvenile. Recently more strict punishment for juvenile has been insisted. In fact, even a legislation was proposed. However, it is a jump to the gun to promote severe punishment without a strong enough foundation, regarding the trends of juvenile crime. Besides, for the stability of the recently amended juvenile law, revision of the law must be considered with caution.

소년법상 우범소년 규정의 개선과 우범소년에 대한 법교육에 관한 고찰

김두상 ( Kim Doo-sang ) 경상대학교 법학연구소 2017 법학연구 Vol.25 No.3

In the Juvenile law, crime-prone juvenile is defined as a juvenile who is prone to violation of penal law; crime-prone base includes `generating anxiety within the community by going around in groups`, `running away from homes without valid reasons` and `drinking and causing disturbances or being exposed to harmful environment`. These provisions, however, are not clear and it is rare to receive actual protective disposition; therefore, no accurate statistics are available on whether how many juveniles were classified as crime-prone and received protective disposition. Such unpractical regulations on crime-prone juveniles should require overall review and for revision of unclear provisions and cases not yet defined as violations of the penal laws, juvenile offender and juvenile delinquent should be separated to be regulated by Juvenile Protection Act. The reason why the juvenile law regulates crime-prone juvenile as juveniles who have not yet committed crimes is that these children are prone to criminal activities therefore should be intervened, protected and educated before committing any crime. Law education is one of the important things for crime-prone juveniles. However current law education at juvenile delinquency prevention centers where law education for juvenile delinquent is performed focuses mainly on juvenile offender and juvenile delinquent even with much effort and various programs; therefore institutional improvement for crime-prone juvenile is needed. For this, various methods through cooperation among schools and law schools should be considered.

우리 소년분류심사원 감호제도의 문제점 및 개선방안: 국제법상 아동의 자유 박탈에 관한 기본 원칙들을 중심으로

장민영 ( Min Young Jang ) 홍익대학교 법학연구소 2014 홍익법학 Vol.15 No.1

International human rights law regarding juvenile justice emphasizes that deprivation of children`s liberty has a very negative effect on children`s harmonious development and requires that states parties take appropriate measures to strictly regulate deprivation of children`s liberty. International human rights standards, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child, provide the basic principles of deprivation of children`s liberty: prohibition of unlawful or arbitrary deprivation of children`s liberty, detention of children only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time, and humane treatment of children deprived of their liberty. To effectively implement the basic principles, international human rights law of juvenile justice requires state parties to enact standards to decide pretrial detention of children in conflict with the law, to protect the right to appeal and the right to have a legal or other appropriate assistance to the children under pretrial detention, to set up time-lines for the right to appeal, and to establish a professional and impartial body to regularly monitor detention facilities and treatment of detained juveniles. Unfortunately, the Korean juvenile justice system fails to comply with the international human rights standards of juvenile justice. The basic principles which the international human rights law has confirmed has not been implemented by Korean laws and practices of detention in Juvenile Classification Review Boards. The standards to decide whether juveniles are detained in Juvenile Classification Review Boards are not legally provided. Korean legislation does not protect the right to appeal for the juveniles detained in Juvenile Classification Review Boards. The rate of detention in Juvenile Classification Review Boards is higher than the rate of pretrial detention regarding regular criminal cases and juvenile criminal cases. What is worse, considerable numbers of juvenile who had been detained in Juvenile Classification Review Boards answered that they had experienced serious human rights violations during their detention. However, the Korean juvenile justice system does not run a monitoring system for humane treatment of the detained juveniles and, therefore, it is not possible to understand the exact situation regarding inhuman treatment of the detained juveniles. Accordingly, this article asserts that Korean legislation should clearly provide the above-mentioned three basic principles of deprivation of children`s liberty: the principle to ban unlawful or arbitrary deprivation of children`s liberty, the principle to use deprivation of children`s liberty only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period time, and the principle to protect humane treatment of the children deprived of their liberty. To practically implement these principles, this article requests the enactment of standards to decide detention in Juvenile Classification Review Boards, the protection of the right to appeal with regard to detention in Juvenile Classification Review Boards, the respect of the right to have a legal or appropriate assistance with regard to the right to appeal, the setting-up of time-lines for the right to appeal, and the establishment of a monitoring system to regularly examine Juvenile Classification Review Boards and juveniles detained in Juvenile Classification Review Boards.