범죄사실의 동일성에 관한 대법원과 미국 연방대법원 판례의 비교 고찰

• 영문명: A Comparative Study on the Cases of the Supreme Court of Korea and the U.S. Supreme Court with respect to the Meaning of “Same Offense"
• 발행기관: 한국형사법학회
• 저자명: 김종구(Kim Jong-Goo)
• 간행물 정보: 『형사법연구』형사법연구 제19권 제3호 (下), 715~734쪽, 전체 20쪽
• 주제분류: 법학 > 법학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2007.01.21

영문 초록

  The Supreme Court of Korea first adopted the "same underlying fact theory" to determine if two offenses are the same. Later, in 1994, the Korean Supreme Court has changed her view and considered normative elements as well as factual relationship in deciding whether two offenses are the same. The Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees that no person shall be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb for the same offense. There has been considerable debate over how courts should determine whether two offenses are the same. The U.S. Supreme Court first looked to the defendant"s conduct and adopted the "same conduct test". According to the same conduct test, court should focus on the underlying conduct of the defendant to determine if two offenses are the same. Later, in Blockburger v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the proper test should focus on the elements of the two offenses and adopted "same elements test". Under the same elements test, two offenses are different if each provision requires proof of a fact which the other does not. However, today, there are countless statutory crimes in a complex industrialized society. A large number of these statutory crimes are distinguishable only by subtle nuance. For that reason, a modern prosecutor could prosecute a defendant repeatedly simply by making minor alterations to the criminal charges. The current view of the Supreme Court of Korea and the U.S. Supreme Court doest not adequately protect defendants under those circumstances. Thus, the author argues that the "same underlying fact theory" or same conduct test should be supported because it can protect citizens from being tried numerous times for the same offense.

목차

Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 범죄사실의 동일성에 관한 대법원 판례의 검토
Ⅲ. 범죄의 동일성에 관한 미국 연방대법원 판례의 검토
Ⅳ. 대법원과 미국 연방대법원 판례의 비교
Ⅴ. 기본적 사실동일설의 재발견과 수정된 기본적 사실동일설
Ⅵ. 맺음말
〈abstract〉

키워드

이중위험 동일한 범죄 기본적 사실동일설 동일요소이론 double jeopardy same offense same underlying fact theory same elements test