영국양형제도의 분석과 국내도입의 문제점 검토 = Analysis of the England Sentencing System and Introduction to the domestic Sentencing System

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Once the defendant is convicted either after trial or having entered a guilty plea, the court will proceed to a sentencing hearing and determine the appropriate sentence that reflects the seriousness of the offence. The court will then pronounce in the open court the imposition of sentence. Sentencing policy and its development is sensitive and complex and is becoming more controversial with increasing political interference and intervention. Much of the new sentencing framework is found in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and Halliday Report of a Review of the Sentencing Framework for England and Wales. Central to the approach of Halliday Reviews is that the courts should have a greater role in the implementation of sentences and offenders should spend more time under supervision after their release from custody. He also wanted to see a greater predictability in sentencing so that the sentencing practice would have a greater different effect on potential offenders.
In the history of the development of sentencing guidelines in England and Wales, Guidelines originated from two separate sources in the 1980s. These were the Magistrates' Association and the Court of Appeal. The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 created the Sentencing Advisory Panel(SAP), a body with a diverse membership, to assist and advise the Court of Appeal in the promulgation of sentencing guidelines. The Panel and the Court of Appeal worked together effectively in this way 1999 to 2003, at which point the Sentencing Guidelines Council(SGC) was established. The Criminal Justice Act 2003, ss. 167-173 has established a new Sentencing Guidelines Council(SGC). The Council, composed mainly but not exclusively of sentencers, took over the task of issuing sentencing guidelines, with Panel performing much the same function as before, but now advising the Council rather than the Court of Appeal. The existing structure for issuing guidelines in the England and Wales, taking the SGC and the SAP together, is unique.
Guidelines are issued by a body which commands authority and respect, and Guidelines are the product of a rational process involving wide consultation. Also there is a process in place for ongoing review and revision of guidelines. The most difficult point to analysis the sentencing system in the England and Wales is that the current sentencing system is among the change. In generally citizen have a more interest in the result of sentencing rather than process of sentencing. In Korea the Sentencing Guidelines Council(SGC) was established in May 2007. The meaning of establishing the Sentencing Guidelines Council(SGC) in the Korea as well as the England and Wales is not in the uniformity of outcome, but in the uniformity of approach.
Therefore Korea Sentencing Guidelines Council must try to achieve not the uniformity of result but the uniformity of approach.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구는 현행 영국의 양형시스템의 내용과 문제점을 형사사법법(The Criminal Justice Act) 2003의 내용과 그 시행에 따른 평가를 중심으로 고찰하고, 이러한 영국의 양형시스템에서 우리가 취할 수 있는 거시적 또는 미시적 요소들이 있는지의 여부를 살펴보는 것을 그 목적으로 한다. 영국의 형사사법법(The Criminal Justice Act) 2003은 양형에 있어서의 일관성을 유지하고 상습적인 범죄인을 대상으로 하여 다른 기관들 사이의 공조를 증진시키기 위하여 형사사법체계의 본질적 개혁을 단행하기 위한 개혁의 산물이다. 동법률은 Halliday가 주도한 보고서와 2002년에 발간한 Home Office의 백서를 바탕으로 제정되었다. 동법률은 형사사법안에서의 많은 제안들을 구체화하였으며 특히 사회내처분의 다양화, 구금형의 유연성 확보, 형사절차, 증거 그리고 양형에 관한 많은 개혁적 규정을 담고 있으며 영국의 양형시스템의 근본적 변화를 주도하고 있다. 이러한 CJA 2003의 목표는 형사사법시스템을 재편하는 것이었다. 영국과 우리나라에서의 양형이 가지는 사회적 중요성은 사실상 거의 같다고 할 수 있으며, 양형법률과 양형실무를 내용으로 하는 전체적인 양형시스템이 사회적 정의의 기준을 만족시킴으로서 범죄인과 국민에게 형평과 공정으로서의 형사정의를 전달해주는 기능을 할 수 있는 방향으로 나가야 할 것이다. 이러한 정의(Justice)는 영국의 Home Office 2002의 백서 'Justice for All' 에서 명시된 양형정책의 핵심요소로 되어있다. 결국 정의를 구체화 할 수 있는 시스템으로서의 양형제도는 ' 같은 범죄(like offences)는 유사하게(similarly) 다루어야 하며, 단지 그들이 한 것(저지른 것) 때문이 아니라 그들이 누구인가 때문에 처벌해서는 안 된다'는 관점위에서 정립되어야 할 것이다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 박상기, "형법상 法益類型과 法定刑에 관한 小考" 19 (19): 2007

2 한상훈, "입법동향분석: 국민의 형사재판참여에 관한 법률(안)을 중심으로" (24) : 2006

3 김한균, "양형의 합리화와 양형기준의 제정-영국 양형기준위원회의 양형합리화 정책-, 형사정책연구소식 제91호(2005,9/10월호)"

4 최석윤, "양형위원회와 양형이론" 18 : 2007

5 최달곤, "비교법과 사회이론" 고려대학교 출판부 1983

6 도중진, "배심원의 권한과 의무" 9 (9): 2007

7 John Cooper, "The Sentencing Guidelines Council A Practical Perspective" (6) : 2008

8 Blackstone's, "Statutes on Criminal Justice & Sentencing" Oxford University Press 2007

9 Martin Wasik, "Sentencing guidelines in England and wales-state of art ?-" 2008

10 Andrew Ashworth, "Sentencing and criminal Justice" 2005

11 Susan Easton, "Sentencing and Punishment" 2005

12 D. A. Thomas, "Sentencing Reform : England and Wales The Politics of sentencing reform" Clarendon Press Oxford 1995

13 "North Carolina Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission Manual"

14 Andrew von Hirsch, "Legislating Sentencing Principle" 2004

15 Martin Wasik, "Going round in circles? Reflictions on fifty years of change in sentencing" 2004

16 Philip Plowden, "Criminal Litigation in Practice" Northumbria Law. Press 2006

17 Stephen Forster, "Criminal Law and Practice" Sweet & Maxwell 2008

18 Julian V. Roberts, "Aggravating and Mitigating Factors at Sentencing: Towards Greater Consistency of Application" 2008