학술논문
공무원으로의 벌칙의제 규정이 문서의 ‘공문서성’을 결정할 수 있는지 여부
이용수 38
- 영문명
- Whether the Legal Fiction of Public Officials can determine the “officialness” of documents
- 발행기관
- 충북대학교 법학연구소
- 저자명
- 이승준
- 간행물 정보
- 『법학연구』第34卷 第1號, 153~171쪽, 전체 19쪽
- 주제분류
- 법학 > 법학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2023.06.30
5,080원
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
Recently, the Supreme Court ruled that a document issued by the governor of the Financial Supervisory Service(FSS) is considered a public document according to Articles 29 and 69(1) of the Act on the Establishment of the Financial Services Commission. Article 69 of this Act states that individuals who are not public officials are treated as public officials when it comes to applying penalties under the Criminal Code or other laws. The governor of the FSS is classified as a public official by presidential decree, thus falling under this Legal Fiction of Public Officials. Based on this regulatory framework, the Supreme Court concluded that a document issued by the governor of the FSS should be considered an official document. This interpretation is justified as it is appropriate to interpret the governor of the FSS and other employees as public officials for the purpose of imposing equal responsibilities and providing them with the same protection as public officials. However, this interpretation does not justify treating crimes against non-government employees as crimes against government employees, as it broadens the scope of the current penalty system and serves as a compensatory mechanism for excessive punishment. According to this interpretation, there are always errors of the the actor. In this case, it would be appropriate to penalize the actor for falsifying a document under Article 15(1) of the Criminal Code. Despite the lack of merit in this interpretation, it is difficult to agree that interpreting, when they provide penalties for non-public officials based on the 'type of criminal law fiction,' exceeds the limits of interpretation. The role of the judiciary is to declare what the law is, and if bad legislation exists, it is the responsibility of the legislature to correct it through new legislation. Expanding the scope of punishment for bad legislation through an interpretation that goes beyond the literal meaning of the text.
목차
Ⅰ. 문제의 제기
Ⅱ. 공무원으로의 벌칙의제 규정과 문서의 공문서성 판단
Ⅲ. 결론
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!
