방조범의 불법구조와 중립적 방조행위의 가벌성판단 = A Review on the Illegal structure of the accessory and Liability in Neutral Behavior

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The behaviors which enable or facilitate the execution of the constituents or strengthen the legal infringement of right by the principal offender may incur an issue of criminal punishment even in the case of so-called ‘neutral behavior’. But it cannot just simply establish aider liability only with the condition of presence of awareness or the possibility
of awareness, the liability should be acknowledged only when the intention to facilitate the behavior of the principal offender is objectively confirmed. Otherwise, everyday activity in terms of profession or the activity of invention of new technologies and tools in accordance with the development of science can be very contracted, also there is the greater possibility that the punishment is made by the judicial authorities’ own volition. Therefore, the liability must be strictly limited in terms of the establishment of aider liability compared to the normal conduct of aiding even in the case where it is acknowledged that the routinely performed occupational behavior etc. affected the establishment of the principal offender liability. In the past, the parties involved were limited based on the liability about professional
conducts in the issues of aiding by the neutral behaviors. Recently, however, contributing to a criminal act through providing neutral technology is becoming an issue. Some of the examples for it are Soribada case of South Korea, accomplices to Japan, neutral aiding, social reciprocality, Winny case, and the range of liability in Winny case. All of these can be seen as the dangerous behaviors which cause the copyright infringement. Using the products from the development of science and technology for illegal purposes regardless of the intention of the developers is entirely the responsibility of those who directly violate the legal interest. It is not reasonable to recognize the establishment
of aider liability only with the fact of recognizing and quoting the principal offender. If the aiding due to neutral behavior is treated the same as the general act of aiding, it results in banning in principle daily professional conducts acknowledged for normal life in the societies of division of labor. Therefore, it should be presumed that what is required to punish neutral behavior of aiding is a conclusive intent unlike the general act of aiding. Even if a conduct is evaluated as seemingly an act of aiding outwardly, it should be excluded from the range of liability in the case the degree of involvement falls short of the levels of criminal penalties in the overall point of view in the law and order, and it should be regarded such that the legal responsibility using this belongs to the range of those who caused direct legal infringement of right. But it may well be possible to punish even the awareness・quotation of criminal acts of principal offender, or the willful negligence that can facilitate the behaviors of principal offender in the case that the behavior, regardless of professional conduct itself or not, can be seen as a part of the criminal act.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 문제의 제기
• Ⅱ. 방조범의 성립과 불법구조
• 1. 공범성립의 구조
• 2. 방조범의 불법구조
• Ⅲ. 중립적 방조행위의 가벌성 제한
• 1. 중립적 행위의 개념
• 2. 가벌성여부에 대한 판단
• 3. 검 토
• Ⅳ. 관련 판례의 검토
• 1. 일본의 Winny 사건
• 2. 배임적 거래행위의 상대방 책임
• 3. 위장 수출회사 관세부정환급사건
• Ⅴ. 맺음말

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 안동준, "형법총론강의" 형설출판사 2009

2 박상기, "형법총론(제9판)" 박영사 2012

3 김성돈, "형법총론" SKKUP 2014

4 정성근, "형법총론" SKKUP 2012

5 성낙현, "형법총론" 동방문화사 2010

6 이상돈, "치료중단과 형사책임" 법문사 2002

7 박상기, "지송이재상교수화갑기념논문집(Ⅰ)" 박영사 2003

8 이상문, "중립적 행위에 의한 방조와 객관적 귀속론" 한국경찰법학회 9 (9): 205-226, 2011

9 신양균, "중립적 행위에 의한 방조" 한국형사법학회 (26) : 1-24, 2006

10 김종구, "중립적 기술 제공과 공범 성립 여부 - 한국, 일본, 미국의 사례와 관련하여 -" 법학연구소 29 : 1-25, 2013

11 김정환, "정범행위에 대한 방조자의 고의" 한국형사법학회 19 (19): 145-160, 2007

12 이용식, "일상적ㆍ중립적 행위와 방조" 법학연구소 48 (48): 302-337, 2007

13 허일태, "소위 의사살인죄" 박영사 (7) : 1999

14 신양균, "배임행위의 거래상대방의 형사책임" 박영사 (15) : 2007

15 원형식, "방조범의 인과관계와 객관적 귀속" 한국형사법학회 21 (21): 209-228, 2009

16 문채규, "방조범의 불법과 중립적 행위에 의한 방조" 법학연구소 31 (31): 115-142, 2014

17 김종구, "미국 형법상 중립적 행위에 의한 방조의 가벌성" 한국형사법학회 24 (24): 77-108, 2012

18 이정원, "가벌적 방조행위의 한계에 관한 연구 - 소위 중립적 행위에 의한 방조를 중심으로 -" 한국법학원 (118) : 214-233, 2010

19 豊田兼彦, "科學技術の開發・提供と幇助犯の成否- Winny事件第一審判決" (629) : 2007

20 小野上眞也, "ファイル公有ソフトの提供につき公衆送信權侵害罪の傍助が認められた事件ーWinny事件第一審判決" 80 (80): 2008

21 小島陽介, "ファイル交換ソフトWinnyの開發・提供を行われた者が著作權法違反幇助罪に問立われた事例" (320) : 2008

22 島田總一郞, "Winny開發・提供者の罪責に関する最高裁判決" (32) : 2012

23 石井撤哉, "Winny事件における刑法上の論点" 19 (19): 2005

24 園田寿, "Winnyの開發・提供に関する刑法的考察[再論]" (22) : 2010

25 Heribert Schumann, "Strafrechtliches Handlungsunrecht und das Prinzip der Selbstverantwortung der Anderen" 1986

26 Günter Stratenwerth, "Strafrecht Allgemeiner Teil Ⅰ" 2004

27 Claus Roxin, "Strafrecht Allegemeiner Teil, Band Ⅱ" 2003

28 Winfried Hassemer, "Professoionell Adäquanz, wistra" 1995

29 Wolhlleben, "Beihilfe durch äußerlichneutrale Handlungen" 1996

30 Frisch, "Beihilfe durch neutrale Handlungen" Lüderssen-FS 2002

31 김일수, "(새로쓴)형법총론" 박영사 2014