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
Throughout issues that may bring an acute discussion on overcriminalization, opinions split whether some act falls into ‘exclusionary factor of requisite elements of crime’ or ‘eliminatory factor of wrongfulness’. While an act belongs to ‘exclusionary factor of requisite elements of crime’ means normal behavior free from crime-related acts, an act belongs to ‘eliminatory factor of wrongfulness’ constitutes every elements of crime but is allowed to be justified by a rule. Discussion on determining the standard for distinction between them has been stagnant, compared to discussion of an act belongs to which one of them.
The appropriate standard can be achieved starting to understand hermeneutics. Interpreting text is a process of constant circulation between the interpreter’s unfixed notion and the text-writer’s seem-to-be already existing notion. Criminal provisions dissected into several elements of crime are interpreted according to interpreter’s intention to manage legal policy. But, stIll. there needs to be a fixed standard to distinguish between ‘exclusionary factor of requisite elements of crime’ and ‘eliminatory factor of wrongfulness’: norm-program, meaning an interpreted aim of the criminal regulation. When a criminal act coincides with the provision’s norm-program, it should fall into ‘exclusionary factor of requisite elements of crime’ category. In this article, I proved its usefulness by applying the standard to various areas of law such as medical criminal law, labor criminal law, and copyright criminal law.
The appropriate standard can be achieved starting to understand hermeneutics. Interpreting text is a process of constant circulation between the interpreter’s unfixed notion and the text-writer’s seem-to-be already existing notion. Criminal provisions dissected into several elements of crime are interpreted according to interpreter’s intention to manage legal policy. But, stIll. there needs to be a fixed standard to distinguish between ‘exclusionary factor of requisite elements of crime’ and ‘eliminatory factor of wrongfulness’: norm-program, meaning an interpreted aim of the criminal regulation. When a criminal act coincides with the provision’s norm-program, it should fall into ‘exclusionary factor of requisite elements of crime’ category. In this article, I proved its usefulness by applying the standard to various areas of law such as medical criminal law, labor criminal law, and copyright criminal law.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론 : 구별의 실익을 중심으로
Ⅱ. 기존 논의의 내용 및 비판적 검토
Ⅲ. 해석학을 통해 밝히는 구성요건 해석의 기준
Ⅳ. 개별적 사례에의 적용
Ⅴ. 결론
【참고문헌】
【Abstract】
참고문헌 (34)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
주관적 정당화요소와 위법성의 본질에 관한 고찰
이진권
법학연구
2010
.08
소비자의 권리행사로서의 표현과 정보통신망법상 명예훼손죄의 성립여부 : 대법원 2012. 11. 29. 선고 2012도10392 판결
모성준
법학논총
2014
.10
[특강_중요 쟁점문제(행정법)] 행정부작위와 국가배상책임의 해석
박정훈
고시계
2014
.01
독일 불법행위책임에서 위법성과 과실의 체계적 지위 : 부작위에 의한 법익침해와 간접적 법익침해의 경우를 중심으로
김종현
법학연구
2013
.03
미국형법상 범죄조각사유 : 정당화사유를 중심으로1
이경재
법학연구
2012
.06
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2014-300-002796305