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.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This study was to investigate the comparison of the criminal forms during the process of criminal acts in the criminal laws between Korea and China. It is similar with the Korean system that there are preparationsㆍstopsㆍconsumated crimeㆍinchoate crimes in the criminal step of China, but, it is different that the criminal law does not admit non-offences.
The criminal law of China imposes punishment on preparations in all cases of crimes, but the criminal law of Korea imposes punishment only under especial regulations, In addition, the criminal law of China regulates preparation crimes only, but the criminal law of Korea regulates not only preparations but also conspiracies.
It is similar in case of imposition of punishment on criminal attempt in both criminal laws. Both criminal laws can mitigate punishment in cases of criminal attempt while they can not do it in cases of consumated crime. However, the criminal law of China is subjective since it focuss the point of criminal purpose on conception of inchoate crimes. On the other hand, the criminal law of Korea moderates both objectivity and subjectivity, In addition, the criminal law of Korea contains general regulations on inchoate crimes as does the criminal law of China.
The criminal law of China imposes punishment on criminal attempt, but the criminal law of Korea imposes punishment only in case that there is specific regulations in relevant article of criminal law. The stop of crime in criminal law of China is correspond to the crime stopped in criminal law of Korea. The stop of crime in criminal law of China indicates the renunciation for himself during the process of crimes or prevent the effect of the result of crime for himself. This is quite similar to the law of Korea.
The criminal law of China regulates remission of punishment on the stop of crime in cases of causing no injury and mitigation of punishment in case of causing injury. These are more definite than the Korean law, which regulates mitigation or remission on the crime stopped. The criminal law of China regards consumated crime as the standard in legal punishment of relevant article of criminal law as the law of Korea does.
The criminal law of China imposes punishment on preparations in all cases of crimes, but the criminal law of Korea imposes punishment only under especial regulations, In addition, the criminal law of China regulates preparation crimes only, but the criminal law of Korea regulates not only preparations but also conspiracies.
It is similar in case of imposition of punishment on criminal attempt in both criminal laws. Both criminal laws can mitigate punishment in cases of criminal attempt while they can not do it in cases of consumated crime. However, the criminal law of China is subjective since it focuss the point of criminal purpose on conception of inchoate crimes. On the other hand, the criminal law of Korea moderates both objectivity and subjectivity, In addition, the criminal law of Korea contains general regulations on inchoate crimes as does the criminal law of China.
The criminal law of China imposes punishment on criminal attempt, but the criminal law of Korea imposes punishment only in case that there is specific regulations in relevant article of criminal law. The stop of crime in criminal law of China is correspond to the crime stopped in criminal law of Korea. The stop of crime in criminal law of China indicates the renunciation for himself during the process of crimes or prevent the effect of the result of crime for himself. This is quite similar to the law of Korea.
The criminal law of China regulates remission of punishment on the stop of crime in cases of causing no injury and mitigation of punishment in case of causing injury. These are more definite than the Korean law, which regulates mitigation or remission on the crime stopped. The criminal law of China regards consumated crime as the standard in legal punishment of relevant article of criminal law as the law of Korea does.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 犯罪豫備
Ⅲ. 犯罪未遂
Ⅳ. 犯罪中止
Ⅴ. 犯罪旣遂
Ⅵ. 檢討
參考文獻
ABSTRACT
참고문헌 (14)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
조선시대의 형사법제 연구 : 조선 형사법제와 현행 형법과의 비교법적 검토(각론)
형사정책연구원 연구총서
2016 .12
-
형사특별법 정비방안(4) 특정경제범죄가중처벌법등에관한법률
형사정책연구원 연구총서
2008 .12
-
조선시대의 형사법제 연구 : 총칙의 현대 형사법 편제에 따른 재정립
형사정책연구원 연구총서
2015 .12
-
형사특별법의 입법구조와 이론적 기초
비교형사법연구
2009 .01
-
형사정책연구 30년의 성과와 과제(II) : 형사법 연구
형사정책연구원 연구총서
2019 .03
-
성범죄관련 입법동향과 형법의 정향(定向)
강원법학
2011 .06
-
범죄피해자 보호제도에 관한 고찰
피해자학연구
2004 .01
-
사회변동과 형법의 과제
비교형사법연구
2010 .01
-
[형사특별법 정비방안(9)] 금융/재정/노동/사회풍속 분야
형사정책연구원 연구총서
2008 .12
-
한국형법 개정의 올바른 방향 -형법총칙을 중심으로-
비교형사법연구
2012 .01
-
형사특별법의 입법구조와 이론적 기초
비교형사법연구
2012 .01
-
군형법 제정의 역사적 배경과 관련 문제점
군사
2012 .03
-
2011년도 형법ㆍ형사소송법 및 형사특별법 제ㆍ개정안 분석과 입법정책 개선방안
형사정책연구원 연구총서
2011 .12
-
결과발생시의 행위와 결과사이의 미수범 평가(評價) : 日本에서의 논의를 중심으로
동북아 문화연구
2012 .03
-
[제2부 과학기술ㆍ정보분야] 형사특별법의 정비 및 편입방안
형사정책연구원 연구총서
2008 .12
-
일본개정형법가안이 제정형법에 미친 영향과 현행 형법해석론의 문제점
형사법연구
2003 .01
-
형사법의 재정비를 위한 기본적 성찰
동아법학
2005 .12
-
새로운 범죄대응전략으로서 화해조정체계구축방안(Ⅱ) - 형사화해조정체계의 구축을 위한 법적ㆍ제도적 정비방안 총괄보고서
형사정책연구원 연구총서
2009 .12
-
남북한 통일 이후의 과거청산 : 통일 전 북한의 범죄행위에 대한 통일 이후의 형사법적 처리
중앙법학
2015 .09
-
형법의 문화수용 – 결혼목적 약취·유인죄 및 독일의 강제결혼죄를 중심으로
비교형사법연구
2019 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-360-017568345