본문 바로가기

추천 검색어

실시간 인기 검색어

학술논문

살인죄와 위법성조각사유의 전제사실에 관한 착오

이용수 204

영문명
Homicide and the Mistake on the Elements of Justification Defenses
발행기관
중앙대학교 법학연구원
저자명
송희식(Song, Hee-Sik)
간행물 정보
『법학논문집』法學論文集 第35輯 第2號, 89~114쪽, 전체 26쪽
주제분류
법학 > 법학
파일형태
PDF
발행일자
2011.08.31
5,920

구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.

1:1 문의
논문 표지

국문 초록

영문 초록

The concept of Homicide has two dimensions. One dimension is the domain of homicide; “the killing of a human being by a human being.” The other dimension is the range of homicide such as “social harmfulness, blameworthiness of that wrongful results, conduct, attendant circumstances, etc.” The domain of concepts and the range of concepts have functional correspondence. In Frege's analysis on the function y = f(x), elements of x constitute domain, and values of y constitute range. The illegality and culpability of homicide are in the range of homicide, which corresponds functionally to each element in the domain of homicide. The frame of domain and range is valid to the elements of “justification” and “excuse”. The domain and range of criminal concepts are useful instruments in the analysis of mistakes on elements of justification. That mistake is called as the mistake over the factual premises of exclusion clause of illegality. According to a theory in current criminal Jurisprudence, we should apply the rule for the mistake of fact to this case since there are neither illegal-intention nor behavior-illegality. According to the other theory, we should apply the rule for the mistakes of law to this case since there are no culpability-intention. The actor shall not be punished for his intentional offenses by any theory, even though he has intention in Tatbestand. All theories in current criminal Jurisprudence about this case are in the fallacy of category mistake. They confuse the domain of intention and the range of it to put them into the same row. Then, in the case of the mistake over the factual premises of exclusion clause of illegality, the problem is whether it is confirming to the justification or not. If the actor had probable causes(or reasonable grounds) at the mistake of facts to be true, his act is confirmed to the “justification” A crime is defined as an illegal and culpable act conforming to 'Tatbestand (elements of an offence)' in current criminal Jurisprudence. But if we look at the real situation of affairs, we can find four exclusive and exhaustive kinds of behaviors in the world: ‘Tatbestand’, “justification”, “excuse” and residuals. The residuals have no meaning in criminal Jurisprudence. The relation of the remaining three is an exclusive confrontational system, not a serial staged system. Then what are illegality and culpability? The illegality(or rightfulness) and culpability(or immunity) are the range of Tatbestand, justification and excuse. These are new paradigm of system theory of crime.

목차

Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 살인죄와 정의역(定義域)·치역(値域)
Ⅲ. 살인죄와 주관적 요건의 정의역
Ⅲ. 살인죄와 정당화요건사실의 착오
Ⅳ. 결어
◆ 참고문헌 ◆
[Abstract]

키워드

해당간행물 수록 논문

참고문헌

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!

교보e캐시 1,000원
TOP
인용하기
APA

송희식(Song, Hee-Sik). (2011).살인죄와 위법성조각사유의 전제사실에 관한 착오. 법학논문집, 35 (2), 89-114

MLA

송희식(Song, Hee-Sik). "살인죄와 위법성조각사유의 전제사실에 관한 착오." 법학논문집, 35.2(2011): 89-114

결제완료
e캐시 원 결제 계속 하시겠습니까?
교보 e캐시 간편 결제