일반논문 : 낙태 범죄화와 여성 섹슈얼리티 통제 -"낙태죄 합헌결정"(헌법재판소 2 012. 8. 23. 선고 2010헌바402 결정)에 부쳐

이연우 ( Yonu Lee ) 서울대학교 BK21 법학연구단 공익인권법연구센터 2015 공익과 인권 Vol.15 No.-

『형법』제269조 이하가 규정하는 낙태죄는 원칙적으로 초기 낙태를 임신 후반부의 낙태와 차별하지 않고 처벌하고 있다. 예외적으로 낙태죄 처벌을 면하게 해주는 『모자보건법』상 허용사유를 보아도 사회경제적 요인으로 인한 불가피한 낙태는 임신 주차수와 상관없이 허용되지 않는다. 비교법적으로 볼 때 이는 많은 국가가 임신 초기 12주까지는 사회경제적 이유나 임부의 요청에 의해 낙태를 허용하는 것과 크게 비교된다. 이러한 과잉형벌화에도 불구하고 한국의 낙태율은 그렇지 않은 국가에 비하여 높은 편이다. 반면 실제 처벌은 거의 이루어지지 않는다. 다시 말해 사문화(死文化)된 규정이라 할 수 있다. 이는 이미 입법단계에서도 논란을 낳았듯이 현재와 같은 낙태죄 규정은 낙태를 할 수밖에 없는 상황에 대한 고려를 전혀 하지 않은, 현실과 괴리가 큰 법이기 때문이라 할 수 있다. 학계에서는 이러한 사실을 인지하고 대부분 낙태죄의 비범죄화를 주장하는 목소리를 내고 있으나 문제는 사회적 분위기이다. 낙태 범죄화와 낙태 반대는 엄연히 다른 문제이지만 많은 사람들은 이를 혼동한다. 낙태죄의 유지에 반대하는 이들도 낙태율 감소를 원한다. 그러나 자기낙태를 형사처벌하는 것은 낙태율 감소의 실익 없이 여성의 자기운명결정권을 침해하고, 남성중심사회의 여성에 대한 통제권만을 강화할 뿐이다. 현행『 형법』상 자기낙태죄에 있어 남성 파트너는 처벌받지 않는다. 그럼에도 불구하고 남성 파트너는『 모자보건법』상 허용사유에 해당하는 낙태에 있어 ‘동의권’을 갖는데, 이는 다시 말해 우리 법제상 남성은 낙태에 있어 원천적으로 죄는 없고 자신의 ‘씨’를 보전할 권리는 철저하게 보호받는다는 말이다. 이러한 동의는 심지어 임부의 생명이 위험한 경우에도 요구된다. 결국 존속하는 낙태죄 규정은 남성 파트너로 하여금 낙태를 한 여성 파트너에게 권력을 행사할 수 있게 만들 뿐더러, 낙태를 하지 않은 여성들도 이 문제에 있어 죄인의 위치에 놓이게 해 전체적으로 한 사회의 남성에 의한 여성의 섹슈얼리티 통제 권력을 강화시킨다. 이러한 과정을 통해 여성은 자신의 신체에 대한 통제권, 삶에 대한 최소한의 자기결정권, 위협을 받지 않고 안전한 삶을 영위할 권리 등을 심각하게 침해당하게 된다. 이에 이 글은 현행 낙태죄가 어떻게 위헌적인지를 설명하고 (헌법재판소의 낙태죄 합헌 결정에 대한 반박), 또한 이러한 낙태죄의 존속이 어떠한 메커니즘으로 여성의 섹슈얼리티를 통제하고 기본권을 침해하게 되는지 살펴보고자 한다. Under the Penal Code, abortion in Korea is punishable by imprisonment for not more than 1 year regardless of the stages of pregnancy. There are several legitimate reasons justifying abortion provided by the Mother and Child Health Act. However abortion on socioeconomic grounds and abortion on demand are still not legally justified. This is a stark contrast with most of developed countries’ regulations which have already legalized early abortion on demand or abortion for socioeconomic reasons. Despite the highly restrictive abortion law, actual indictment for abortion is rare in Korea; while the assessment of the abortion incidence is higher than other countries. This is why the Article of criminal abortion in the Penal Code is called dead letters. However, it still survives and functions as a mechanism to control women’s lives and sexuality. Under the Penal Code, the male counterpart shall never be the subject of criminal abortion. However, he is secured of his right to disagree with the abortion under the Mother and Child Health Act without limitation. In other words the male’s right to preserve his blood is thoroughly protected while he is free of the original sin of abortion. This right to agree does not become extinct even when the health of the pregnant women is at stake. This article will explain how the criminalization of abortion enhances the male dominance over female and oppresses the sexuality of women in 4 ways; (i) to grant the superior position to male partners, (ii) to only blame the whole female population regarding abortion, (iii) to isolate the aborted women unprotected, (iv) to endanger the women’s health and control over her own body [part IV]. In Part III, the current decision of the Constitutional Court to deny the unconstitutionality of the criminal abortion is also criticized; Article 269 of the Penal Code violates the women’sconstitutional right of s elf-determination.

이슬람세계의 낙태문화에 대한 이해 - MENA 지역을 중심으로

김종도 국제언어인문학회 2018 인문언어 Vol.20 No.1

This paper aims to study the view of abortion in Islamic world and the current state of abortion in MENA countries. First, the researcher studied Islam’s outlook on marriage as a premise for understanding this paper. All countries except Israel in the MENA region forbid abortion based on the religious reasons although the Quran and Hadīth don’t speak clearly about abortion. Islam insists that killing an innocent person is like killing the entire human race. Because abortion is a crime of murder, the researcher has come to the conclusion that the population of Islamic countries is increasing. Abortion in Islam is not a generalized topic because it is considered haram (prohibition by Allah), so it belongs to the domain of Allah rather than human beings. It is impossible to determine abortion standards as a standard of western society. However, there is a view that it is necessary to reconsider the traditional concept of abortion due to westernization and the expansion of education due to the influence of SNS. Nevertheless, Islam is deeply rooted in the base of Islamic societies, and the possibility of abortion tolerance in the future seems unlikely. All of Islamic juristic schools agree that abortion is permissible in order to save the life of a pregnant woman, and even though abortion is allowed until the end of four months of pregnancy, it is never encouraged for Muslims. As we see in table 2, it has been noted that Tunisia, Bahrain and Turkey are tolerant countries for abortion, and other countries are strictly against abortion because of religious reasons. However, the success rate for contraception is expected to increase relatively in the future.

형법 제269조 제1항 헌법불합치 결정에 따른 낙태죄의 법제정비 방안

강지현,민영성 부산대학교 법학연구소 2020 법학연구 Vol.61 No.1

On April 11, 2019, the Constitutional Court in Korea ruled that punishment for abortions violated the self-determination rights of the pregnant woman. This gives us the opportunity to revise the law on abortions again 66 years after the abortion crimes were defined in the Criminal Code. Should abortion be punishable as a criminal offense? In order to derive reasonable legislation for abortions, we first analyze the grounds for the recent decision of the Constitutional Court on abortion crimes. Next, we look at the attitudes of discipline on abortion in other countries and draw out the problems of our existing legislation. Thus the role of criminal law to prevent abortion is considered. The Constitutional Court has made relatively specific statements on the direction of the overall amendment, regarding the possible durations of abortion - 12 and 22 weeks - and the recognition of social and economic reasons. It did not require the legislator to give up punishment in order to protect the life of the fetus. However, punishment is a means that can be considered as a last resort because of its intrusive nature. Abortions can in principle be reported illegally and punishable. But abortions within a certain period should exceptionally be recognized as the fundamental rights of pregnant women. An abortion within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy is permitted without explanation. Counseling on abortion is essential. Counseling promotes the responsibility of pregnant women for fetal life and provides information on social and economic support. There is an urgent need to improve the laws and institutions related to abortion. The relevant provisions of the Penal Code should be revised in a timely manner and adopted with regard to the reasons for the adaptation and the obligation to consult. To reduce abortion, it is more effective to promote social assistance for pregnant women than punishment.

낙태죄 제・개정 및 법적 논쟁의 역사:사회・정치적 맥락을 중심으로

신유나,최규진 전남대학교 5.18연구소 2020 민주주의와 인권 Vol.20 No.2

This study summarizes the course of legislation and amendment of criminal abortion focusing on social and political background. In the 1950s, Korea was faced with inadequate circumstances due to the division of nation and the aftermath of the Korean War, and many women were forced to have abortions due to socioeconomic difficulties. However, the political community at the time included abortion in the Criminal Law of Korea thinking that population growth is necessary to strengthen national power. In the 1960s, population control was deemed necessary for national economic development, and family planning program was included in the first five-year economic development plan. In the early stage of family planning program, population control was attempted by promoting contraception, but this method was found to be very limited. Therefore, population control policy was followed by way of invalidating criminal abortion. However, the situation was open to change as long as the criminal abortion is specified in the Criminal Law. In 1987 and 1992, a plan was devised for the amendment of the Criminal Law in reference to criminal abortion as a way to produce the actual effect of allowing abortion. It was an attempt to preserve the criminal abortion and bring charge only against women who when through abortion, and thereby maintain the existing patriarchy in the larger framework of govern, while attaining the effect of allowing abortion. Confronted with strong resistance from the religious communities, however, only a few terms were modified. In the 2000s, the basic population condition completely changed to promote population growth policy emphasizing ‘abortion prevention.’ Even the progressive governments retained the criminal abortion and followed the nationalist population policy such as ‘policies in response to low fertility.’ This course of history eventually met with the conservative approach to artificial termination of pregnancy in the Lee Myung-bak administration and resulted in the 2009 incident of GYNOB (Pro-life Society of Doctors) declaring suspension of illegal abortions and disclosing doctors who have carried out abortions. In the aftermath, the Constitutional Court ruled that the criminal abortion was constitutional in 2012. Nevertheless, the incident became a springboard for the growth of feminism in our society. The abortion debate which was sparked again in the Park Geun-hye government in 2016, resulted in an unconstitutionality suit at the Constitutional Court once again. This time, however, the case was concluded with a ‘constitutional discordance adjudication’ in the context of regime change and growth of feminism.

Comparative Abortion Politics : Laws, Practices, Backlashes

Woliver, Laura R.,Tangney, Patricia 숙명여자대학교 아세아여성문제연구소 2002 Asian Women Vol.14 No.-

Nation states monitor women's reproductive choices to various degrees. Abortion regulations, even those that criminalize all abortions, nevertheless do not stop women from seeking abortions. Criminalized abortion does endanger the lives and health of girls and women in any country. Often the girls and women harmed the most by restrictive abortion laws are poor, young, immigrants, or ethnic or religious minorities. This article examines the forces in several countries which impact abortion laws and practices. The pattern in Latin America is to have pious anti-abortion rhetoric yet a wide- spread practice of illegal abortion. The civil society culture in Western Europe reflects a market choice model of abortion juris- prudence and practice. For the former Soviet Union and East/Central European emerging democracies, their abortion laws are affected by nationalistic concerns over low birth rates for desired groups of people. Islamic countries see women as important signifiers for the purity and righteousness of their cultures. Abortion restrictions in Islamic countries reflect male political control over females imbedded in hostility to modernity. China and India display the need to carefully protect women's choices. In China and India true choices for women are sometimes actually forced choices where women's bodily integrity and agency is forsaken. We point out the ubiquity of abortion in every society. What attracts state opposition often is when women themselves openly, officially, are given the right to choose. Even when abortion is criminalized, however, women find illegal and often dangerous means to abort while states deny these practices and behaviors.

변화하는 시대상황과 낙태

김희수 한국기독교사회윤리학회 2008 기독교사회윤리 Vol.15 No.-

When a new age comes, new social needs occur and new ethical principles are needed and formed. Abortion is one example of this. Views on abortion have changed through human history. Simply asking whether abortion is a sin or ethical act is an improper, thus the wrong, question. Abortion is a very complicated issue. The act of abortion needs to be judged according to the circumstances. Some people say that it is the sin of manslaughter. On the other hand, some say that it is just getting rid of a collection of cells. Others take the middle view by saying that it is a sin but ok if done within a certain period of time because the fetus is not considered to be a human person yet within that time period. Still other people say that abortion must be prohibited in all circumstances, as opposed to those who say that there are unavoidable exceptional cases. Some people say that a pregnant woman’s human rights are more important than that of the fetus, therefore the decision must be given solely to the pregnant woman. Yet some say that the right of the fetus is more important than the pregnant woman’s. Korea has a law prohibiting abortion except in a few unavoidable extreme situations. However, people do not keep the law. They just go ahead and abort the fetus regardless of the circumstances. Many medical doctors perform abortions without considering the ethics of their actions and many of them even see abortion as a chance to make a fortune. Also there are people who argue that socio-economic considerations must be added to the list of unavoidable reasons for abortion. Meanwhile other people say that abortion allowed due to diseases must now be removed from the list because the development of medical and genetic science can cure those diseases. Indeed, abortion is a very complicated issue. This article will deal with these issues and offer a few guidelines.

낙태죄 헌법소원과 여성의 ‘목소리’[2] ―법과 낙태실천과의 관계를 중심으로―

양현아 한국법철학회 2018 법철학연구 Vol.21 No.1

이 글은 낙태법과 여성들의 낙태 실천 간의 간격을 중심 문제로 제기하면서, 여성들의 낙태에 대한 인식에 대한 면접조사를 통해서 여성들이 낙태에 대해 가진 추론방식(reasoning)에 대해 조명하고 있다. 형법상 낙태죄 및 모자보건법 제14조에 규정된 인공임신중절 관련 규정을 살펴본 후, 2012년에 내려진 낙태죄에 대한 헌법소원에 대한 헌법재판소의 결정을 낙태죄의 ‘보호법익론’의 측면에서 고찰하고 있다. 현재의 보호법익론에 따르면 ‘태아의 생명’은 무엇과도 견줄 수 없는 지상의 가치가 되기 때문에 가령 ‘임부의 자기결정권’과 비교할 수 있는지를 묻는다. 오히려, 여성주의에서 말해 온 여성과 태아 간의 상호연결성, 보살핌의 윤리의 관점에 섰을 때, 낙태에 대한 새로운 시야가 열릴 수 있을 것이라고 이 글은 제안한다. 본론에서는 여성들의 낙태인식 조사결과를 분석하는데, 이 글에서는 주로 낙태실천과 법과의 관계에 관한 아래와 같은 두 질문을 중심으로 하였다. “법이 낙태를 금지한다면 원치 않는 출산을 할 것인가”라는 질문과 “법이 낙태를 허용한다면 좀 더 쉽게 낙태를 할 것인가”라는 질문들이다. 전자의 질문에 대해서 84.6%의 응답자(총 34인)들이 “법으로 금지한다고 해도 원치 않는 출산을 하지 않을 것이다”라고 응답했고, 15.4%의 응답자들은 “출산을 선택하겠다”는 취지로 응답했다. 다수의 응답자들은 추상적인 생명보다는 구체적인 양육을 중심으로 출산 여부를 결정할 수밖에 없다는 논리를 전개하였다. 무엇보다 출산은 ‘개인의 선택’이며, 양육에 대해 국가가 해 주는 것이 많지 않고, 여성과 남성 간의 낙태와 출산에 대한 입장이 다른데 법정책은 남성의 입장에 서 있다는 의견 등도 제시되었다. 생명의 소중함에 바탕하여 출산을 하겠다는 의견도 있었다. 후자의 질문에 대해서도 법의 허용 또는 금지와 무관하게 자신의 필요에 의해서 낙태를 선택할 것이라는 의견이 지배적이었다. 또한, 낙태가 합법화되면 산부인과 병원을 찾는 부담과 주위에서의 평가에 대한 심리적 부담감이 완화될 것이라고 보았다. 또한, 많은 응답자들은 10대, 20대의 무분별한 성관계와 낙태에 대해 우려감을 가지고 있었고 성교육의 중요성을 강조했다. 이상과 같은 낙태 체험에 대한 여성들의 이야기는 낙태법이 한국 여성들의 성성과 낙태 체험에 깊숙이 영향을 미쳐 온 매우 ‘살아 있는 법’임을 대변하고 있다. 낙태법은 여성들의 낙태를 불법화함으로써 음지에서 낙태를 체험하게 만들었고, 개인의 문제로 ‘사사화’(私事化)시켜 왔다. 여성들은 낙태가 가져오는 신체적이고 정신적이고 사회적인 고통을 온전히 혼자서 감내해 왔다. 불법인 낙태의 사회적 낙인효과와 함께 태아에 대한 죄책감이 더해져서 침묵해야만 할 경험으로 남았고, 이 경험이 성교육 등에서 파트너 간의 윤리라든가 피임대책 등으로 선순환되지 않았다. 현재의 낙태법은 시민들의 현실과 동떨어진 영토에 머물면서 시민들을 지배하고 있는 법이라고 진단한다. 이 글에서 조명한 여성주의 가치론을 따르게 되면, 태아의 생명과 임부의 결정이 마치 대척점에 서 있는 것과 같은 이분법적 사유에서 벗어날 수 있고, 임부에게 낙태란 자녀에 대한 양육책임에 대한 예견 등 종합적인 사유를 통한 결정이라는 것을 이해 가능하게 만든다. 여성들의 입장에 서서 추론할 때, 현행의 낙태죄의 법익론은 형식적 ... This study examines the dynamics between the law of abortion and the women’s voices in Korea. Since most of the abortions in Korea have been illegal due to the law’s narrow scope of the permission, women could not but have been silent about their experiences on abortion. In the chapter 2, it examines the Articles of Abortion in the Criminal Code of Korea, the Articles 269 & 270 [Abortion by the Medical Personnel], and the Article 14 of Mother and Child Health Act. Particularly, this article critically reviews the Constitutional decision which was held in 2012 regarding the Abortion in the Criminal Code. The Constitutional Court in Korea ruled this article to be congruent with the Constitution. According to the Court, the ‘life of the fetus’ as the legal interest(保護法益) of those clauses has more importance in its public interest, while that of ‘women’s right to elf determination’ has only the private and supplementary interest. In the chapter 3, it presents the result of the empirical survey that investigated women’s experiences of, and perceptions about, abortion. The survey interviewed 34 women, who had or had not abortion. Doing this, it is intended to make the women’s voice audible especially at the court that does not seem accommodate the women’s reasoning even in the isseus of abortion. In this article, mainly two kinds of questions were dealt with: “Would you give a birth to a unwanted-child, when the law forbids the abortion?” and “Would the abortion increase, when the law permits it?” The two questions contains basically the same logics regarding the relation between the abortion law and the practice. For the former question, 84.6% of the respondents had the opinion of “No birth to the unwanted child although the law was against it” and 15.4% replied that “I would choose to give a birth to the baby.” Main rationale for these responses were found in the responsibility of child-rearing; the birth of the such child causes the child being unhappy; my own choice is important; no government would raise my child; different positions between women and men, but the law does not accept the women’s. There are also opinions about the “importance of life no matter what.” For the latter question, 78.6% of respondents replied that “The abortion would not increase due to the legal permission,” whereas 24.1% thought that “The abortion would increase when it is legally allowed.” For this question, majority of the respondents expressed their opinion that they would choose abortion or giving a birth to the baby regardless of law since the issue is on her own, her life, and the family rather than the law and the state. In conclusion, suggestions for philosophical grounds of the abortion law and policies are made. The article emphasizes that the law should accommodation women’s reasoning and experiences. The connection between mother-child; the importance of care in the notion of ‘life(生命)’, and reproductive rights. In sum, “there is no easy abortion in the world.” Allowing abortion as the women’s decision will be the first step to accommodate women’s need in the system of reproductive policy in Korea.

외상 후 스트레스 장애로서의 낙태

배정순(Bae, Jeong Soon) 국가생명윤리정책원 2018 생명, 윤리와 정책 Vol.2 No.1

낙태문제를 해소하기 위해, 제대로 된 실태파악과 더불어 낙태를 개인적 외상이 아닌, 하나의 사회적 외상으로 인식하는 노력이 필요하다. 이를 통해 낙태를 치유의 대상으로 인식함으로써 보다 적극적이고 신속하게 문제 해결을 위해 노력할 수 있다. 낙태를 찬성하거나 혹은 반대하는 측 모두, 생명이 소중하다는 점에는 이의가 없다. 낙태를 찬성하는 측도 생명은 소중하다고 생각하지만 사회의 구조적 병폐나 부조리를 한 번에 해결할 수 없으므로, 차라리 낙태를 법적으로 허용해야 한다고 주장하고 있다. 그러나 낙태시술은 매우 위험하다. 대부분 의사의 경험과 감각에 의존해 시술되므로 병원에서 이루어지는 시술도 위험하다. 여성의 몸과 마음에 큰 외상과 후유증을 낳고, 태아를 죽음에 이르게 하는, 그 누구에게도 이롭지 않는 낙태를 합법화 할 이유는 없다. 낙태는 여성(생물학적 모)과 남성(생물학적 부), 그리고 그들이 속한 가족과 사회, 국가 등 공동체에 상처와 후유증을 남긴다. 낙태를 허용하는 것은 문제 해결을 위해 단순하고 폭력적인 방법을 선택하는 것이다. 우리의 낙태 현실은 매우 비극적이다. 낙태는 개인적 이유만이 아닌 사회적, 공동체적 문제와 연결되어 있다. 낙태가 모두의 안녕을 위협하는 사회 병리라는 사실을 인식한다면, 더 이상 방치할 수 없게 된다. 임신한 아기를 낳을지 말지를 고민하기 전에, 그러한 어려운 선택의 기로에 서지 않도록 국가와 사회가 나서야 한다. 필요에 의해 나보다 약한 존재를 마음대로 할 수 있다는 생각이야말로 폭력이자 범죄이다. 여성에게 낙태를 강요하거나 낙태를 할 수밖에 없는 상황으로 내모는 사회야말로 폭력적이고 미개한 사회이다. 겉으로는 여성이 스스로 낙태를 선택하는 것처럼 보이지만 사실은 강요받는 경우가 많다. 이것은 사회적 폭력이다. 여성은 낙태로 드러나는 사회적, 구조적 폭력의 피해자일 뿐이다. 아무도 도와주지 않은 채, 철저하게 고립되고 학대받은 여성은, 결국 자신에게도 씻을 수 없는 상처가 되고 자궁에서 살아 숨 쉬는 고귀한 태아 생명마저 저버리는 낙태를 차라리 허용하라고 외치는 지경에 이르렀다. 낙태는 여성 혹은 남성만의 책임이 아니며 공동체의 책임임을 통감해야 한다. 더 늦기 전에 국가와 사회가 이 비극을 막아야 한다. 낙태의 진실을 직면하고 낙태를 하나의 사회적 외상, 트라우마로 인식함으로써, 낙태를 갈등이 아닌 함께 극복해야할 대상으로 바라볼 수 있어야 한다. 낙태치유는 낙태로 드러나는 사회적 폭력, 사회적 병리를 해소하고 죽음의 문화에서 생명의 문화로 나아가는 첫걸음이 될 것이다. The reality of abortion in korea is very serious. To solve abortion problems, we could recognize abortion is a trauma, post-traumatic stress disorder. It is necessary to recognize abortion as a social trauma, not a personal one. There is no question that life is precious, either pro-choice or pro-life. Abortion procedure is very dangerous. There is no safe abortion. Most abortions are performed depending on the experience and sense of the doctor, and can cause a number of side effects. The abortion is to kill the fetus, so women instinctively feel that abortion is murder. So she feel guilt. The guilt can eventually lead to a mental illness, loss, various interpersonal issues, and so on. There is no reason to legalize abortion, which gives rise to severe trauma and aftereffects on women`s minds and bodies, and kills babies, and is not beneficial to anyone else`s. Abortions leave scars and aftereffects on biological mother, biological father, and communities they belong to, society. To allow abortion is to choose simple and violent way to solve the problem. We must make efforts to protect the rights to life, happiness and human rights of both babies and women. When we look at the process of abortion, it is not only for personal reasons, but also for social problems and community problems. Recognizing that abortion is a social pathology that threatens the well-being of everyone, we can effort together on a solution apart from attritional controversy. A society that pushes women to choose abortion is a violent and uncivilized society. On the surface, it looks like a woman’s choice, but in reality, she is forced to abort. So this is social violence. Women are only victims of social and structural violence that is revealed by abortion. It is not only the responsibility of a women or men, but also the responsibility of the community. The nation and society must prevent this tragedy before it is too late. By facing the truth of abortion and recognizing it as a social trauma, the problems of abortion should be overcome together rather than big conflict. The abortion therapy will be the first step in getting rid of various conflicts and pathology in our society and moving from a culture of death to a culture of life.

낙태에 대한 여성의 인식과 태도- 낙태 허용도와 여성의 낙태 결정권을 중심으로 -

김도경,허윤주 부산대학교 여성연구소 2013 여성학연구 Vol.23 No.3

Women entirely have had to burden damage from abortion since the Korean government regulates abortion in 2010. However, women are being forced to keep silence by structure of society because abortion is recognized as a murder or crime in our society. This article represents how women can break the silence and discourse on abortion as main agents. For this purpose, this study analyzed women's awareness and attitudes toward abortion focusing on a degree of acceptance and women’s right to determine abortion. Based on the analysis, women have a relatively receptive awareness and attitudes toward the abortion’s degree of acceptance and women's right to determine abortion. In addition, both the abortion’s degree of acceptance and women's right to determine abortion function as important variables because they have adequacy of explanation. However, women tend not to be free from social stigma of abortion. In the feminist movement, an abortion should be regarded not only as an act of abortion but also as social context and women's human rights. Moreover, it will be necessary to systematically provide opportunities that women can create a discourse of abortion as agents. 2010년 정부의 낙태 단속 이후 그 피해는 전적으로 여성 개인의 몫으로 돌아가고 있다. 그러나 여성들은 낙태는 살인이고 범죄라는 사회적 구도에 의해 침묵을 강요당하고 있다. 이에 본 연구에서는 여성들이 침묵을 깨고 주체로서 낙태에 대한 담론을 형성해 갈 수 있는 장을 모색하고자 한다. 이를 위해 낙태에 대한 여성의 인식과 태도를 낙태 허용도와 여성의 낙태 결정권을 중심으로 분석하였다. 여성들은 낙태허용과 여성의 낙태 결정권에 대해 비교적 수용적인 인식과 태도를 가지고 있는 것으로 분석되었다. 그리고 낙태 허용도와 여성의 낙태 결정권은 설명력에 있어서 서로 중요한 변인으로 작용하고 있다. 그러나 여성들은 낙태에 대한 사회적 낙인으로부터 자유롭지 못한 경향을 보이고 있다. 여성운동은 낙태를 단순히 낙태행위로만 바라보는 것이 아니라 사회적 맥락과 여성의 인권차원으로 다루어져야 할 것이다. 또한 여성운동은 낙태에 대한 담론을 여성들이 주체로서 형성해 나갈 수 있는 장을 체계적으로 마련해 나가야 할 것이다.

낙태 문제에 관한 비교법적 연구- 세계 각국의 입법례와 판례를 중심으로 -

김광재 대한변호사협회 2018 人權과 正義 : 大韓辯護士協會誌 Vol.- No.473

It is a sensitive and difficult issue that allow abortion across the ages and in all countries of the world. After that the Constitutional Court, on August 23, 2012, ruled that the abortion punishment is constitutional(2010HeonBa42), but this matter, which had been quiet for a while, became hot again on account of national petition on the internet website of the Blue House in autumn 2017. The Constitutional Court said that the division of the fetus according to the stages of growth can not legitimize and if the punishment is not executed, abortion will become more prevalent than it is now. And it is not enough to be an effective means of preventing abortion that realize universalization of contraception, sex education and support for pregnant women. However, many countries have succeeded in effectively abolishing the abortion rate by legalizing the abortion instead of punishing the abortion, through the social infrastructure movement and educational approach to contraception, providing information and counseling on pregnancy, and providing public services for abortion. The study of legislation cases, precedents, and abortion policies on abortions around the world suggests that the approach to abortion in our country, which is in a paradoxical situation with a high abortion rate, is punishing until the abortion in the early pregnancy. 낙태 허용 여부는 동서고금을 막론하고 민감하면서도 어려운 문제이다. 헌법재판소가 2012년 8월 23일 낙태 처벌 규정에 대해 합헌결정(2010헌바42)을 한 후 한동안 잠잠하던 이 문제는 2017년 가을 청와대 홈페이지 국민청원을 통해 다시 한번 뜨겁게 달아올랐다. 헌법재판소는 태아를 성장 단계에 따라 구분하여 보호의 정도를 달리하는 것은 정당화될 수 없고, 낙태를 처벌하지 않으면 현재보다도 훨씬 더 낙태가 만연하게 될 것이며, 성교육과 피임법의 보편적 상용, 임부에 대한 지원 등이 낙태를 방지할 효과적인 수단이 되기에는 부족하다고 보았다. 그러나 이미 많은 나라들은 낙태를 처벌하는 대신 합법화하면서도 피임에 대한 사회인프라운동과 교육적 접근, 임부에 대한 정보제공 및 상담, 낙태의 공공서비스 지원 등을 통해 효과적으로 낙태율을 낮추는데 성공하고 있다. 세계 각국의 낙태에 관한 입법례와 판례, 그리고 낙태 정책을 살펴보는 것은 임신 초기의 낙태까지 처벌하면서도 오히려 높은 낙태율을 보이는 역설적인 상황에 처한 우리나라의 낙태에 대한 접근 방식에 시사하는 바가 클 것이다.