초록

The discussion on sentencing is becoming the hot issue in a learned circle and practical business. Those discussions basically come up with an issue up to the judge's discretionary assessment. Hence, an irrationality of the sentencing would be brought out for a rational and transparent (objective)guidelines dismissing irrationality relevant to sentencing. Meanwhile, most crimes generate by an interaction between a victim and a perpetrator. Therefore, as determining the punishment, unless all the circumstances related to the victim should be considered, it is impossible to judge the whole circumstances relevant to a crime accurately. In accordance with that, the victim's role should be considered in the course of a sentencing. From the view that a crime is a results of a mechanical interaction between victim and perpetrator, the judgment of the victim's role against the perpetrator's illegality and responsibility takes a critical part in sentencing. In spite of that, according to the Article of Criminal Code 51-2, it regulates the matter only as to 'relation with victim'. The law, however, just leave the examination on the victim in the lump as judge's discretion relevant to judgments. Whereupon, it should be raised more concrete and segmental new guideline for the objective and rational sentencing, not following existing judgement. With the matter, we will look into the victim's role as a factor of sentencing which decreases illegality and responsibility related to a crime. First, we defined the concept among the polysemy of the victim and followed a sentencing course detaily. On the basis of such system, examining the victim's role in sentencing, we especially inquired into a contributive extent of the victim to a crime as the other party by types. It is necessary that the sentencing theory should be tried to find out the concept which is more precisely and intersubjectively verifiable about the circumstances relevant to 'relation with victim. It could offer the judges to the right material of sentencing and also provide the perpetrator as well as victims and their familes to the persuasive sentencing. Besides, a right guidelines for a victimological study would also be offered.

키워드

양형, 피해자, 양형사정, 양형기준, 피해자 공동책임

참고문헌(44)open

  1. [학술지] 박광민 / 형사절차상 피해자의 지위강화 / 형사법연구 (10) : 202 ~ 203

  2. [기타] 坪井祐子 / 2007 / 被害者∙關係者∙第3者の落ち度が量刑に及ぼす影響

  3. [단행본] 原田 國男 / 2003 / 量刑判斷の實際 / 現代法律出版

  4. [기타] 坪井祐子 / 前揭論文

  5. [학술지] 이용식 / 2006 / 형사피해자의 지위에 대한 소고 / 피해자학연구 14 (1) : 5 ~ 22

  6. [학술지] 이용식 / 2007 / 형벌론과 형사실체법에서 피해자의 역할 / 피해자학연구 15 (1) : 93 ~ 110

  7. [기타] 박광민 / 전게논문

  8. [학술지] 최석윤 / 양형에서 피해자의 의미 / 형사정책연구 7 (2) : 24 ~ 25

  9. [학술지] 박일환 / 1993 / 양형에서의 피해자에 대한 고려 / 피해자학연구 (2) : 58

  10. [학술지] 松尾浩也 / 刑の量定 / 刑事政策講座 1 : 337

  11. [기타] 原田 國男 / 量刑判斷の實際

  12. [학술지] 최석윤 / 1997 / 양형에 대한 기초적 이론 / 형사정책연구 8 (1)

  13. [기타] 박일환 / 양형에서의 피해자에 대한 고려

  14. [기타] 이주영 / 2008 / 우리나라에 적합한 양형기준제

  15. [기타] 佐伯千仭 / 1963 / 刑の量定の基準

  16. [단행본] 原田 國男 / 2003 / 量刑判斷の 實際 / 現代法律出版

  17. [단행본] 정성근 / 2008 / 형법총론 / 삼지사

  18. [기타] 原田 國男 / 前揭書

  19. [기타] 佐伯千仭 / 前揭書

  20. [단행본] 森下忠 / 1996 / 刑事政策大綱[新版第2版 / 成文堂

  21. [기타] 김성돈 / 형법총론

  22. [기타] 박일환 / 전게논문

  23. [기타] 坪井祐子 / 2007 / 被害者∙關係者∙第3者の落ち度が量刑に及ぼす影響 / 98面.

  24. [기타] 최석윤 / 피해자의 승낙과 양형

  25. [단행본] 이재상 / 2005 / 형법총론 / 박영사

  26. [단행본] 신동운 / 2008 / 형법총론 / 법문사

  27. [단행본] 오영근 / 2007 / 형법총론 / 박영사

  28. [단행본] 정웅섭 / 2006 / 형법강의 / 대명출판사

  29. [단행본] 장영민 / 1994 / 피해자의 승낙 / 고시계

  30. [기타] 진계호 / 1997 / 피해자의 승낙

  31. [단행본] 김일수 / 2007 / 형법총론 / 박영사

  32. [단행본] 배종대 / 2008 / 형법총론 / 홍문사

  33. [단행본] 박상기 / 2007 / 형법총론 / 박영사

  34. [기타] 이용식 / 형벌론과 형사실체법에서 피해자의 역할

  35. [기타] 生田勝義 / 2005 / 挑發と量刑

  36. [기타] 松岡正章 / 1996 / 被害者側の挑發と量刑

  37. [기타] 松岡正章 / 前揭書

  38. [단행본] 塩谷 毅 / 2004 / 被害者の承諾と自己答責性 / 法律文化社

  39. [기타] 塩谷 毅 / 前揭書

  40. [기타] 坪井祐子 / 被害者∙關係者∙第3者の落ち度が量刑に及ぼす影響

  41. [기타] 坪井祐子 / 前揭書

  42. [기타] 박광민 / 형사절차상 피해자의 지위강화

  43. [기타] 이용식 / 형사피해자의 지위에 대한 소고

  44. [학술지] 김성돈 / 우리나라 피해자학의 연구동향 / 피해자학연구 (7) : 102