메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국법학회 법학연구 法學硏究 第20輯
발행연도
2005.11
수록면
415 - 435 (21page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The policeman so far has had a more partiality for arrestment of criminals, collection of evidences, and discovery of substantial truth. That is, it is impossible to deny that the police has neglected human rights due to the pursuit of achievements with excessive emphasis on the arrest rate.
The policeman in its administrative point of view is a powerful government agency that can use strong authorized public power by means of protecting public security and maintaining order. Here the policeman investigation means the police's action which is a preparatory and supplementary means that can be counted on if they need to use physical public power. And one of the most representative ways is the questioning by a patrolling policeman. There are two ideas in the police investigation. One is the public good in which it main purpose is police work, the other one is the private good which is protected by reason of defending rights. Between these ideas some conflicts arise and it's not a matter of higher good but the question of how to harmonize these two issues.
The Instant Compulsion in Interference crime of exercise public official duties by the policeman is the operation that the police officer realizes a required condition without ordering its partner a notice in advance, and that it is opposite to legal stability and predictability.
We tried to find out the method of protecting the human right, as possible, in the Instant Compulsion in Interference crime of exercise public official duties by the policeman. Of course, it is certain that laying out the possibility of the unlawful and unreasonable infringement is the best way. Because of that elements and means of Instant Compulsion in The Law of Police need to be legislated. And it is prohibited to interpret and apply elements and means arbitrarily in substantive enactment.

목차

Ⅰ. 序說
Ⅱ. 職務執行의 範圍ㆍ適法性과 關聯判例
Ⅲ. 暴行罪ㆍ脅迫罪와의 關係
Ⅳ. 業務妨害罪와의 關係
Ⅴ. 결어
參考文獻
ABSTRACT

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-360-017561033