대명률(大明律) 보고한기(保辜限期)규정의 형사법적 의의 = A criminal analysis of Bogo-Hanki(保辜限期) in Ta Ming Lu(大明律)

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In ``Ta Ming Lu(大明律)``, penal code of the Joseon Dynasty, there are provisions titled by ``Bogo-Hanki(保辜限期)``. It contains that : if someone beats or injures victim, it needs to have a fixed period for the conclusion of criminal result and due the period he/she is assigned to some duty. Concretely, at first in aspect of the conclusion of criminal result, several terms are defined for several types of heating or injury and then the result, only in that terms occurred, will be a basis of purnishment. Thus, if the victim die in that terms due to the injury, offender will be purnished as bodily injury resulting in death. But if out of that terms will be purnished only as bodily injury. At second in that terms the charge of restoration of criminal damage is imposed to the offender. If the damage is recovered well by the treating of offender, the punishment for offender will be decreased as a necessity. As a record of the Annals of the Joseon Dynasty these rules are applied rigorously for the serious consideration of human life, because these rules conrol whether the offender die or not. The rule of ``Bogo-Hanki`` in ``Ta Ming Lu`` has twice means in aspect of modern criminal law : a requisite of the offense, a rule for restoration of criminal damage. At first it will be a problem that whether these provisions are objective condition of punishment or not. But these rules have a function to determine the legal result of cirme directly, so these must be treated by a condition of completion for crime. In detail it is more reasonable to consider these rules as a concretive measure of objective Imputation, determining whether the normative danger is realized or not on the assumption that the causation for the crime is completed. Second one, in aspect of recovery of criminal damage these rules show that the ``Ta Ming Lu`` intend to restoration of victim as a important purpose of punishment, in comparison with modern criminal law, it excludes the victim for the status of the party concernd. In this regard these rules can stand comparison with modern Case-Managing Mediation.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 강우예, "형사상 조정제도의 목적에 따른 분류와 그 절차적 함의 -미국의 논의를 중심으로-" 한국피해자학회 17 (17): 103-126, 2009

2 신동운, "형법총론 제5판" 법문사 76-, 2010

3 이재상, "형법총론 제5판" 박영사 70-, 2003

4 김성돈, "형법총론 제2판" 성균관대학교 출판부 127-, 2009

5 오영근, "형법총론 제2판" 박영사 99-, 2009

6 김일수, "형법총론 제11판" 박영사 171-, 2006

7 임웅, "형법총론 개정판 보정" 법문사 69-, 2006

8 정영일, "형법총론 개정판" 박영사 77-, 2007

9 김성돈, "조선전기 형사법과 형정운용에 나타난 愛民的 刑事政策" 법학연구소 20 (20): 277-309, 2008

10 "조선왕조실록 홈페이지"

11 법제처, "조선왕조 형사제도의 연구" 박영사 1974

12 "정조 52권, 23년(1799 기미 / 청 가경(嘉慶) 4년) 11월 6일(경신) 5번째기사"

13 "정조 4권, 1년(1777 정유 / 청 건륭(乾隆) 42년) 7월 15일(무인) 1번째기사"

14 "영조 7권, 1년(1725 을사 / 청 옹정(雍正) 3년) 8월 6일(신미) 1번째기사"

15 "세종 65권, 16년(1434 갑인 / 명 선덕(宣德) 9년) 8월 25일(기사) 2번째기사"

16 "성종 146권, 13년(1482 임인 / 명 성화(成化) 18년) 9월 30일(을축) 7번째기사"

17 심재우, "동양의 자연법사상" 33 : 369-377, 1997

18 "대법원 1994. 3. 22, 93도3612 판결"

19 "대법원 1982. 12. 28, 82도2525 판결"

20 법제처, "대명률직해" 1964

21 김성규, "객관적 처벌조건과 범죄의 성립요건" 법조협회 56 (56): 72-97, 2007

22 "篤疾 : 매우 위독한 병"

23 "殘疾 : 몸에 병이나 탈이 남아 있는 일"

24 양종모, "朝鮮時代 刑事裁判에 나타난 法文化―王의 死罪에 대한 減刑 判付를 中心으로―" 민족문화연구소 (36) : 86-112, 2007

25 "廢疾 : 고칠 수 없는 병. 불치의 병으로, 폐인이 되는 병"

26 서울대학교 규장각, "大明律講解" 2001

27 타나카 토시미쯔(田中俊光), "《秋曹審理案》을 통해 본 19世紀 中葉 朝鮮의 刑事政策" 한국법사학회 (35) : 41-74, 2007

28 "≪日省錄≫ 五十二 正祖 元年 丁酉 七月 戊寅(十五日) 기사"