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.
논문 기본 정보
- 저자정보
초록·키워드
The employment restriction under Art. 56 of the Protection of Children and Adolescents against Sexual Abuse Act automatically bans sex offenders from being employed at certain types of work places for 10 years, if the offense resulted in criminal conviction. The ban does not allow room for discretion by a judge as to whether such ban should be sanctioned or for how long. The Korean Constitutional Court has recently held that such ban is unconstitutional
The Korean Constitutional Court gave examples of legislation in which an employment ban can overcome constitutionality issue: for example, the judge presiding the criminal sentencing can determine the likelihood of repeat offense, or a stratified system that sanctions employment ban in proportion to the likelihood of repeat offense can be used. The German legislation, which was also mentioned in the Constitutional Court opinion, requires that the offender committed his or her crime in abuse of his or her profession before employment ban can be sanctioned. As these examples suggest, in order to overcome constitutionality challenge, the employment ban under the law should allow a judge to individualize employment ban based on the likelihood of repeat sex offense. It should also be considered if employment ban should be triggered only if the previous employment was abused in the offense.
The Korean Constitutional Court gave examples of legislation in which an employment ban can overcome constitutionality issue: for example, the judge presiding the criminal sentencing can determine the likelihood of repeat offense, or a stratified system that sanctions employment ban in proportion to the likelihood of repeat offense can be used. The German legislation, which was also mentioned in the Constitutional Court opinion, requires that the offender committed his or her crime in abuse of his or her profession before employment ban can be sanctioned. As these examples suggest, in order to overcome constitutionality challenge, the employment ban under the law should allow a judge to individualize employment ban based on the likelihood of repeat sex offense. It should also be considered if employment ban should be triggered only if the previous employment was abused in the offense.
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-ECN-0101-2017-510-002240248
