학술논문
형법대전(刑法大典)의 내용상 특징 - 적용범위와 죄형법정주의를 중심으로
이용수 507
- 영문명
- The Character of 《Hyeongbeob Daejeon》"s Contents
- 발행기관
- 한국형사법학회
- 저자명
- 허일태(Hoh Il-Tae)
- 간행물 정보
- 『형사법연구』형사법연구 제20권 제2호, 91~110쪽, 전체 20쪽
- 주제분류
- 법학 > 법학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2008.01.25
5,200원
구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.
국문 초록
영문 초록
《Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典》 enacted 1905 was the first penal code with a few modern system in Korea, even though it accepted provisons of 《the Ming Code/大明律》 substantially. 《Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典》 did not discard too concrete and detailed provisions as a prescribing way of a crime because this code accepted system and contents of 《the Ming Code/大明律》 in many ways. As fixed sentence by each provision permitted few discretion of judge, in a good many of cases it was difficult to rule reasonable sentence related illegality and responsibility of crime. To solve these systematic problems of 《Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典》, the Code adopted 《In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附》 that enabled to draw an analogy among similar cases.
However, permitting interpretation by analogical inference what was called 《In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附》 was apprehended that the judge punished arbitrarily, involved unacceptably problem with the principle of criminal responsibility. For these reasons, 《Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典》 imposed the following three types of restrictions about permitting 《In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附》.
First, the crimes to be imposed capital punishment did not permit 《In-ryulbi-bu/引律比附》.
Second, it was impossible that for judge absolutely applied 《In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附》, judge had to ascertain no accurate provision for the case, ask superior authority the question of whether it"s all right to apply a suitablelooking provision, and arrange at superior authority"s instruction.
Third, judge had to be punished when he or she arbitrarily applied 《Inryul-bi-bu/引律比附》 for the act was the distortion of law.
Consequently, we should not condemn the criminal 《In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附》 unconditionally from the modern principle of “nulla poena sine lege”. Although the principle of “nulla poena sine lege” is being adhered to a certain degree in terms of Merkmal, a balanced sentencing has not been completely deciding in every case between crime and penalty. We have seen many times that sentencing could be came down by an individual judge"s viewpoint.
However, permitting interpretation by analogical inference what was called 《In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附》 was apprehended that the judge punished arbitrarily, involved unacceptably problem with the principle of criminal responsibility. For these reasons, 《Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典》 imposed the following three types of restrictions about permitting 《In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附》.
First, the crimes to be imposed capital punishment did not permit 《In-ryulbi-bu/引律比附》.
Second, it was impossible that for judge absolutely applied 《In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附》, judge had to ascertain no accurate provision for the case, ask superior authority the question of whether it"s all right to apply a suitablelooking provision, and arrange at superior authority"s instruction.
Third, judge had to be punished when he or she arbitrarily applied 《Inryul-bi-bu/引律比附》 for the act was the distortion of law.
Consequently, we should not condemn the criminal 《In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附》 unconditionally from the modern principle of “nulla poena sine lege”. Although the principle of “nulla poena sine lege” is being adhered to a certain degree in terms of Merkmal, a balanced sentencing has not been completely deciding in every case between crime and penalty. We have seen many times that sentencing could be came down by an individual judge"s viewpoint.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 형법대전의 체계와 내용개요
Ⅲ. 형법대전 총칙의 특징, 특히 적용범위와 죄형법정주의
Ⅳ. 현행 형법과의 비교법적 관점에서 형법대전의 죄형법정 주의
〈Abstract〉
Ⅱ. 형법대전의 체계와 내용개요
Ⅲ. 형법대전 총칙의 특징, 특히 적용범위와 죄형법정주의
Ⅳ. 현행 형법과의 비교법적 관점에서 형법대전의 죄형법정 주의
〈Abstract〉
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
참고문헌
관련논문
최근 이용한 논문
교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!
신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.
바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!