인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
피인용 0
초록·키워드
The Supreme Court recently changed its attitude to require that the meaning of assault or intimidation, which is a component of the crime of indecent act by compulsion, be defined as an assault or intimidation of the crime of assault and intimidation under the criminal law. In this regard, it is also significant that the gap between the trial practice and the legal principles of previous precedents has been bridged at a time when the trial practice does not already see the meaning of assault and intimidation of indecent act by compulsion as the narrowest meaning. The discrepancy between reality and precedent has been resolved. However, we cannot help but raise two major questions.
One is the crime of indecent act by compulsion under the same law, but why the meaning of assault and intimidation between assault and intimidation is different. The other is whether the same statutory sentence of quasi-indecent act by compulsion is logically and systematically reasonable compared to using a state of inability to protest, as the ruling changes the view that assault or intimidation of indecent act by compulsion does not have to make the other party difficult. As it is a critical review of the target judgment, I would like to focus on the latter question and briefly mention the former in relation to the latter issue.
One is the crime of indecent act by compulsion under the same law, but why the meaning of assault and intimidation between assault and intimidation is different. The other is whether the same statutory sentence of quasi-indecent act by compulsion is logically and systematically reasonable compared to using a state of inability to protest, as the ruling changes the view that assault or intimidation of indecent act by compulsion does not have to make the other party difficult. As it is a critical review of the target judgment, I would like to focus on the latter question and briefly mention the former in relation to the latter issue.
본문·목차
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
UCI(KEPA) : I410-151-25-02-092133311
