http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 주제어 : Use of Genetic Information (검색결과 7 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
유전자감식의 제문제 ; 개인 유전정보의 형사사법적 이용의 문제점과 이에 대한 해결방안
윤영철 ( Young Cheol Yoon ) 한국형사정책학회 2006 刑事政策 Vol.18 No.2
The high technology in modern society like bio-technology or information technology requires more and more the use of individual genetic information not only in the field of research or medical service but also in the criminal procedure. In spite of the growing demand, so far there is no appropriate legal rules which set up to control the use of the individual genetic information in the criminal courts in a way to protect the personal information. As the criminal justice deals with the punishment which will seriously affect one`s basic benefit of the law, the use of the genetic information in a criminal court should be carefully controlled. On the other hand it is not imaginable and undesirable to totally prohibit it, for the use of genetic information apparently gives undeniable benefits to us. So it is the only choice left to us to make out technical and normative criterions in using the genetic information, the DNA Databank, etc., with them to fulfil the important, seemingly conflicting, values, for example the efficiency of criminal justice and the protection of the human rights of the suspects. At the same time the traditional principles of criminal procedure should also be taken into account. In this article several issues are pointed out and their solutions are suggested. At first, it recommends to set up concrete technical and normative criterions for the genetic identification which should secure at least reliability, propriety, fairness. Secondly, the strict reliability-criterions and permission-requisites of DNA evidence should be set up in order to find out the feasibility of it as evidence. Thirdly, in case of the DNA Databank, the technical and normative criterions for its reasonable operation should be set up and the procedural requisites for its transparent and fair operation should be regulated by law. And lastly, it suggest that there should be active public discussions to make more objective judgments on the social benefits and harms of high technology, the efficiency of the criminal justice, the protection of individual information, the usefulness and limits of genetic information in the criminal justice, etc.
-
형사상 유전자감식정보의 수집·관리 등에 대한 검토 - “디엔에이신원확인정보의 이용 및 보호에 관한 법률”을 중심으로 -
황인수,김재희 경희대학교 법학연구소 2011 경희법학 Vol.46 No.1
“The Use and Protection of DNA Identity Establishment Information Act” has enforced in Korea since 26th, July, 2010. This law has been disputed for about ten years, and legislated last January. Its purpose is to catch the criminals who committed violent crimes and narcotic crimes quickly. Although this law regulated to take the prisoners or restraint suspects of DNA information, it invades person’s privacy because DNA information figures out person’s privacy like his medical history. However, invasion of privacy can restricted when public interest is much more important than private interest. So we can explain about invasion of privacy for this reason. The problem of violating persumption of innocence and commitment can be solved to make some solutions. For example, in this law, if a person agreed with taking his DNA information, police or prosecutors take them. But the law will be able to amend how police or prosecutors can’t deal out the DNA information without warrant. It’s one of the best ways to solve the problems. In the case of the suspect be confirmed innocent, the law enacts that the suspect’s genetic material for DNA test will be discarded and the data will be deleted, too. But this provision has a weak point, so we need to strengthen that. I suggest that filed materials and database open to the suspect and the suspect’s family in the case of suspect’s death. Along with the law, DNA information is divided into two public institutions(police and prosecutors) to maintain it. But it's very inefficient. So I suggest that the other public organization unify and supervision over the information. I think that it’s a very desirable thing. It’s a very useful system what obtain the identity of the criminal through DNA information. This law has just enforced. So if we can amend and make up for the faults,it will be very useful and according with the purpose of the law.
-
‘디엔에이신원확인정보의 이용 및 보호에 관한 법률’의 위헌성에 대한 검토 - 개인정보자기결정권에 대한 침해를 중심으로 -
이준일 대한변호사협회 2011 人權과 正義 : 大韓辯護士協會誌 Vol.- No.422
‘Act on the Use and Protection of DNA Identification Information (DNA Act)’ is a law enacted to achieve the purpose of criminal investigations and crime prevention by obtaining DNA information through the DNA testing of DNA samples. This DNA information is the ‘personal information’ that can confirm the identity of individuals. Such personal information is protected by the constitutional ‘right to informational self-determination’. This constitutional right to informational self-determination is not a absolutely guaranteed right, but may be limited. However,the limitation of constitutional rights is required to comply with the constitutional principles for the limitation. The DNA Act that justifies DNA sampling and testing as well as obtaining and using of DNA information of suspects arrested and prisoners for the purpose of criminal investigations and crime prevention violates the principle of warrant requirement, the equality principle, the principle of prohibition of comprehensive legislation delegation and the principle of proportionality constitutionally required for the limitation of fundamental rights, especially the principle of minimal damage and the principle of balance. ‘디엔에이신원확인정보의 이용 및 보호에 관한 법률’은 DNA시료에 대한 DNA감식을 통하여DNA정보를 취득함으로써 범죄수사 및 범죄예방의 목적을 실현하고자 제정된 법률이다. 여기서 DNA 정보는 개인의 신원을 확인할 수 있는 ‘개인정보’에 해당한다. 이러한 개인정보는 ‘개인정보자기결정권’에 의해서 헌법상 보호된다. 개인정보자기결정권도 절대적 기본권은 아니기 때문에 제한될 수 있지만헌법상 요구되는 기본권제한의 원칙을 준수해야 한다. 범죄수사와 범죄예방을 목적으로 수형자 등과구속피의자 등의 DNA시료를 채취ㆍ감식하고, 이를 통해 DNA정보를 획득ㆍ이용하는 국가의 행위를정당화하는 DNA법은 헌법상 보장된 ‘영장주의원칙’에 위배될 뿐만 아니라 ‘평등원칙’과 ‘포괄위임입법금지원칙’ 및 기본권제한적 법률에 대해서 헌법이 요구하는 ‘과잉금지원칙’, 특히 피해의 최소성과 법익의 균형성에 위배된다.
-
-
-
-
KCI
스콜라연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
