활막육종

김재도,윤영민,손정환,홍영기,손영찬,박정호,Kim, Jae-Do,Yoon, Young-Min,Son, Jeong-Whan,Hong, Young-Gi,Son, Young-Chan,Park, Jeong-Ho 대한근골격종양학회 1996 대한골관절종양학회지 Vol.2 No.1

Synovial sarcoma is an uncommon malignant soft tissue tumor which usually occurs in young-aged person, and frequently involves the lower extremities. Many authors recommended wide excision, adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation therapy. The proposed factors that affect the prognosis are age, size of tumor, site of tumor in the body, depth of tumor, histologic grade and method of treatment. The purpose of the study is to analyze the factors that affect the 5-year survival rate. We retrospectively evaluated 19 cases of synovial sarcoma treated in the Kosin University Medical Center from Jan. 1982 to Dec. 1994. The overall 5-year survival rate was 47.6% and the 5-year survival rates were significantly higher(P<0.05) in the group with smaller size of mass. The significantly lower 5-year survival rates were observed in the patient with deeply located lesion and with higher histologic grade. The 5-year survival rates were higher in the patients treated with wide excision than in the patients treated with amputation. But there was no significant difference between these groups. The adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy were performed. In conclusion, we suggest that the better prognosis will be observed in the patients with smaller size of tumor mass, superficially located and lower histologic grade.

학회발표논문 : 소급효금지원칙의 확립 근거와 구체적 적용

홍영기 ( Young Gi Hong ) 안암법학회 2006 안암 법학 Vol.- No.22

특수강도죄의 실행의 착수시기

홍영기(Hong Young Gi) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2009 성균관법학 Vol.21 No.1

In der Literatur und Rechtsprechung besteht der Meinungsstreit, wann der Versuch beim Wohnungseinbruchsraub in der Nachtzeit beginnt. Nach herrschender Meinung sei dieser Fall kein qualifizierter des §333, sondern ein zusammengesetztes Verbrechen. Dabei sollte Mindestvoraussetzung für das Ansetzen die Annahme eines Versuchs der Anfang von Teilverwirklichung des objektiven Tatbestandes sein. Aber nach der meisten Auffassungen müsste dieser Wohnungseinbruchsraub immer erst mit der Gewaltausübung als Versuch begonnen werden. Also sei die „Regel„ selbst hier nicht anwendbar. Der Begriff von zusammengesetzten Delikten ist selbt ungenau, also ist diese scheinbar so eindeutige Bedeutung ins Wanken geraten. Die theoretische Bedeutung der Begriffsbildung besteht nur darin, dass bei zusammengesetzten Delikten die verschienden Handlungen sich befinden. Aber diese Bedeutung ist praktisch nicht nutzbar. Auch der Beginn dieses besonders schweren Raubes muss von der allgemeingültigen Dogmatik der Ausführungshandlung gerechtfertigt werden. Die am meisten verbreitete Methode zur Abgrenzung von Vorbereitung und Versuch besteht in der Formeln, die den Beginn des Versuchs den Begriff des Ansetzen konkretisieren sollen. Das objektive und subjektive Unrechtselemente des Versuchs liegt im Beginn der Ausführungshandlung, der im Anschluss an den Tatentschluss geprüft wird: Als Anfang der Ausführung denkt man, dass der Täter nach seinen Vorstellungen von der Tat zur Verwirklichung des Tatbestandes unmittelbar angesetzt haben muss. Damit nicht mehr vereinbar ist, eine rein objektive Abgrenzung, wonach der Beginn mit tatbestandsmässigen Ausführungen relevant sein soll; auch eine rein subjektive Abgrenzung, wonach für den Versuchsbeginn allein das Vorstellungsbild des Täters massgebend ist. Damit kann der Beginn der Tatbestandshandlung auch bei zusammengesetzten Delikten exakt nach dieser Regel festgelegt werden. Der Täter muss zu ihrer Verwirklichung der Verletzung von Rechtsgüter unmittelbar ansetzen. Das Ergebnis dieser Typenbildung hängt nicht nur davon ab, was der Täter tatsächlich bewirkt hat, sondern auch in welchem Zusammenhang mit dem beschützten Rechtsgut etwas geschehen sollte. So muss bei der Ausführungshandlung des besonders schweren Raubes auch die Gewaltanwendung bevorstehen. Aber beim besonders schweren Fall des Diebstahls muss der Täter dagegen bereits beim Einbrechen mit Diebstahl gehandelt haben.

한국 교회의 새로운 리더십과 신학적 과제

홍영기(Young Gi Hong) 한국기독교학회 2004 한국기독교신학논총 Vol.35 No.-

The Korean Church has stagnated since the 1990s. Since then the Korean Church has experienced the downgrading of social credibility and the decline of spiritual vitality. However, for sustaining and healthy growth of the Korean Church in the future, she has to develop new kinds of leadership and be prepared theologically. This paper suggests that the Korean church has to develop servant leadership, lay leadership, evangelistic leadership, self-leadership, successive leadership, social leadership, and world mission leadership. This paper also suggests that the theological tasks of the Korean church include theological education for pastoral ministry, the development of mission-oriented theology, the development of social theology, the internationalization of Korean church theology, the development of Kingdom theology, the building of theological and missionary network, and the deeper understanding of the role of the Holy Spirit. The author believes that the plan of God for the Korean church is much bigger and more abundant than the plan we can imagine, and the dream of God for the Korean Church will come true when the church leaders are well prepared in leadership and in theological mind in the future.

조용기 목사로부터 배우는 리더십의 10가지 비밀

홍영기 ( Hong Young Gi ) 한세대학교 영산신학연구소 2007 영산신학저널 Vol.9 No.-

선택적 척추신경근 차단술을 통한 방사통의 치료

홍영기(Young Gi Hong),사석진(Sok Jin Sa),김재도(Jae Do Kim) 대한정형외과학회 1997 대한정형외과학회지 Vol.32 No.4

2020년 형사법분야 대법원 주요판례와 평석

홍영기 ( Young Gi Hong ) 안암법학회 2021 안암 법학 Vol.- No.62

물권변동과 관련된 계약이행의무 위배행위가 배임죄에 해당하지 아니하는 것으로 본 반복되는 여러 판례나 위계에 의한 미성년자간음죄에서 위계의 의미를 기존에 비해 확대하여 해석한 판례는 지금 사회에서의 변화된 요구에 부합하는 결론을 취하고 있다. 반면에 명예훼손죄의 공연성요건을 전파가능성개념을 통해 확대해석한 판례는 다수 문헌의 비판에도 불구하고 기존 입장을 그대로 유지하고 있다. 사건의 동일성 범위를 넘어서고 있는 사실에 대해 공소장변경신청을 불허해야 한다는 법원의 입장은 자칫 공소장변경의 필요성과 허용성을 혼동하는 것으로 비칠 우려가 있다. 위법수집증거배제법칙을 엄격하게 적용할 수 없는 경우를 지적하면서, 피고인이나 변호인이 간과했다거나 항변하지 않고 용인했다는 논거를 이용하는 것은 합리적이지 않다. 양벌규정에 따라 종업원과 사업주가 함께 기소된 때에 이들이 공범인 공동피고인 인지 여부와 관계 없이 어느 한편을 대상으로 작성된 피의자신문조서는 다른 피고인의 공판과정에서 그 피고인의 내용인정 없이는 증거로 쓰일 수 없다고 해야 한다. 하급심에서 부정기형을 선고받고 항소한 피고인이 성인이 되어 정기형을 선고해야 할 때에, 불이익변경금지원칙을 유지할 수 있는 기준으로서, 부정기형의 단기와 장기의 중간시를 제시한 새로운 판례는 방법론적으로 의미 있는 근거를 제시하지 못하고 있는 것으로 보인다. Repetitive tendency in several judicial precedents, where conduct comprising a breach for performance of contractual obligation related to transfer of a real right was deemed not to be constituted as a breach of trust, or a precedent, in which a meaning of ‘deceptive scheme’ in Korean Criminal Act, Article 302(Sexual Intercourse with Minor, etc.) was interpreted in an extensive manner compared to existing precedents, has been concluded corresponding with the needs of current society. On contrast, precedent that extensively interpreted ‘openly in public made libel and slander’ - one of the prerequisite to establish defamation - by means of possibility of propagation stands its ground despite all the criticism. According to court's opinion, an amendment of an indictment ought to be denied subject to a count that surpasses the range of the unity and identity of count(criminal facts subject to judgement). Such opinion could be possibly seen as if it confuses between the necessity and acceptability of amendment to an indictment. It is not reasonable to deploy argument by presenting the grounds that a defendant or a defense attorney overlooked or did not rebut rather accept, while pointing out certain occasion when the exclusionary rule of the illegally obtained evidence could not be strictly applied. When both employee and employer are indicted due to joint penalty provision, the protocol of examination of a criminal suspect which was written regardless of whether they are joint defendant(accomplices) or not, shall not be used as an evidence in another defendant's trial proceedings without recognition of the defendant's. The latest precedent showed us that ‘intermediate’ prison sentence between long-term and short-term of indeterminate sentence could be given to the defendant as a standard for maintaining the principle of the prohibition of disadvantageous alteration, when the defendant received an indeterminate sentence in lower court(court trial) became adult eligible for determinate sentence. However, it does not seem to provide a methodologically significant judicial reasoning.

시효이론의 역사적 전개와 그 평가

홍영기(Hong, Young-Gi) 한국법사학회 2008 法史學硏究 Vol.37 No.-

시효이론은 공소시효, 형집행시효 등 형사법상 시효제도의 의미와 본질을 설명하고자 하는 것으로서, 시효가 법제도로 자리잡은 때에 시작되어 현재에 이르고 있다. 로마법에서 시효가 출발하였다는 가정에서 민사시효의 특색으로부터 형사시효의 본질을 곧바로 추론하는 이론은 민법의 청구권과 형벌권의 구별되는 특징을 간과하고 있다. 이른바 ‘시간의 힘’이론과 실체법설은 시간의 흐름에 따라서 형벌권을 이루는 대상이 사라져간다는 데에 초점을 맞추고 있는데, 그것은 형벌부과의 당위를 배제하는 이유로 충분하지 않다는 점에 한계가 있다. 오랜 시간이 흐른 이후에 소송절차가 어려워진다는 점을 이유로 한 소송법설은, 국가가 절차상의 어려움을 이유로 형벌의 의무를 스스로 포기할 수 없다는 원칙으로부터 비판할 수 있다. 실체법설과 절차법설을 결합하는 방식으로도 이러한 한계들은 극복될 수 없다. 시효의 본질은 기존 이론들이 제시한 몇 가지 요건을 통해서가 아니라. 국가 형벌권과 시간의 흐름의 관계에 대한 더 근본적인 차원의 새로운 고찰을 통해서만 파악될 수 있다. This article is mainly about a critical view on the establishment and development of theories which deal with the nature of criminal statues of limitation. The debate over this, which is one of the major theoretical arguments, is still highly issued among the studies of criminal law. Statues of limitation first appeared in Roman law and are based on the codes of civil law. Since then, scholars have supplied various arguments for the nature and general purpose of criminal statues of limitation. The question, however, is whether they are procedural or substantive. The substantive view claims that obligations according to a criminal penalty cannot be indemnified no matter how long time goes by or regardless of either procedural reasons or technical reasons. Therefore, if a person is fully reclaimed from his criminal records, there is no reason to penalize him more. In this case, statues of limitation free the culprit since it means that his records have gone into history and they do not have to be taken up any more. The procedural ground presents the idea that imposing penalty cannot be changed in time; consequently, statutes of limitation should be grounded on only procedural basis. To make it impartial, prosecution should be provided with up-to-date and reliable evidence. Hence, statutes of limitation force law-enforcement and prosecutors to apprehend wrongdoers and let them stand at the bar. There is another case which mixes two points above but adds nothing more; it just connects two different positions. Nonetheless, no assertioncan give a clear explanation about the nature of the statues of limitation. They just provoke doubts about their methods since the substantive one just has factual foundation without legal principle; procedural one has its own technical problems which prevent it from inflicting a penalty on an offender; the mixed one shows all the shortcomings in both point of views. This critical assessment comes out because these three theories lack principles with philosophical and academic stand. To secure its place in criminal law, statutes of limitationneeds a fundamental and theoretical interpretation of its nature. Otherwise, it will wander along the absurd claims from the mass that statutes of limitation should be nullified for justice.

소추재량권의 실현으로서 일죄일부기소

홍영기 ( Young Gi Hong ) 안암법학회 2017 안암 법학 Vol.0 No.53

실체법상 죄수문제와 소송법상 죄수가 무관하다는 전제, 그리고 소송법상 사건의 개수는 언제나 일사부재리의 효력 범위와 관련하여 전법률적·일상적 관점에서 바라보는 사건의 동일성 기준에 따르는 것임을 인정하는 한, 일죄일부의 공소제기가 허용되는지 여부의 논의는 형사소송법학에서 계속 필요하다고 볼 뚜렷한 근거가 없다. 방법론적으로 볼 때 동일성이 인정되는 소송법상 하나의 사건 가운데 일부의 사실만을 공소장에 기재하는 것이 불가피하기 때문이다. 기소편의주의에 따른 소추재량으로 설명되는 것이지만, 그에 앞서 일죄의 전부를 기소할 수 있는 가능성이 국가기관에게 없는 것이라고 보는 것이 더욱 정확하다. 이러한 논의의 한계는 일죄일부기소에서 `일죄`를 실체법적인 개념으로 바라본다고 해서 극복될 수 있는 것이 아니다. 강간죄를 비롯하여 어떠한 실체법상 일죄의 형태도, 일부기소를 불가능하게 하는 사정이 되지 못한다. 공소불가분원칙을 고소불가분원칙처럼 일부의 공소제기가 있는 경우라고 하더라도 전부의 사실이 기소된 것으로 취급해야 한다는 원리로 이해하게 되면, 일죄일부기소가 허용되지 않는 것처럼 생각될 것이다. 그 논리에 따를 때에는 직권주의 소송구조의 소송물 관념과 마찬가지로 범죄사실대상설에 따르게 된다. 그러나 제248조 제2항은 일죄일부의 기소가 있는 때에 그 공소사실만 공판정의 심리대상이 되나, 재판의 효력은 전부에 미치는 것으로 보아야 한다는 뜻으로 새겨진다. 이와 같은 이해가 기소편의주의를 취하고 있는 우리 입법의 태도에 부합하는 것일 뿐만 아니라, 통설과 판례가 전통적으로 취해 온 소송물이론 가운데 이원설과도 상응하는 것이다. 그리고 그에 따라 뜻이 불분명한 공소불가분원칙이라는 표현은 형사소송법학에서 더 이상 의의가 없는 것으로 보아야 한다. Der Begriff der Tatsache im prozessualen Sinne bestimmt den Prozessgegenstand. Der Verfahrensgegenstand, auch Prozessgegenstand genannt, hat durch die Person des Angeklagten eine personliche, durch die angeklagten Tatsachen, d. h. Lebenssachverhalt eine zeitlich-ortlich bestimmte Komponente. Von der Bestimmung des Verfahrensgegenstandes hangt der Rahmen ab, in dem das Gericht tatig werden und aburteilen darf. Rechtshangigkeit, Zulassigkeit einer Klageanderung un Umfang der Rechtskraft eines erganenen Urteils bestimmen sich nach dem Verfahrensgegenstand. Daruber hinaus ist der Verfahrensgegenstand von großer Bedeutung im Zusammenhang mit "ne bis in idem", dem Verbot wegen derselben Sache jemanden ein zweites Mal zu bestrafen. Unter Tat in diesem prozessualen Sinne ist ein einheitlicher Vorgang, ein historisches oder konkretes Vorkommnis zu verstehen, das sich von anderen ahnlichen oder gleichartigen unterscheidet un innerhalb dessen der Angeklagte nach Beschreibung der Anklageschrift eine Straftatbestand verwirklicht haben soll. Hierzu gehort das gesamte Verhalten des Taters, soweit es nach naturlicher Auffassung eine einheitlichen Lebensvorgang darstellt. Wichtig ist, dass dieses vorrechtliche Vorkommnis der gesamten Verhalten von einem allgemenen Beobachter als Tateinheit verstanden werden soll, und dass der so verstandene Prozessgegenstand logisch bei Anklage des Staatsanwaltes teilbar ist. Sogar kann man auch sagen, dass jede Anklage im Strafverfahren immer nur ein Teil der prozessualen Tat sein soll. Das sogenannte Prinzip der Unteilbarkeit des Verfahrensgegenstandes kann also bei unserem System nicht vertretbar. Nach Opportunitatsprinzip darf der Staatsanwalt auch z. B. beim Fall der tateinheitlichen Notzucht fur die Privatsphare des Opfers als bloß eine Gewalt oder eine Drohung anklagen.

검사작성 피의자신문조서의 실질적 진정성립 인정방식

홍영기(Hong, Young-Gi) 한국형사법학회 2009 刑事法硏究 Vol.21 No.2

Für die Hauptverhandlung vor Gericht gelten vor allem die Grundsätze der Unmittelbarkeit und der Mündlichkeit. Diese gebieten es, dass sich das Gericht selbst einen eigenen Eindruck von den Beweisen verschafft und die eigentlichen Beweismittel nicht durch Surrogate ersetzt. Die mündliche Vernehmung der Angeklagten kann also nicht dadurch in der Hautverhandlung ersetzt werden, dass das bei Staatsanwalt geschriebene Vernehmungsprotokoll im Ermittlungverfahren aufgenommen wird. Das neue Strafprozessrecht regelt erneut die Schriften für diesen Unmittelbarkeitsgrundsatz als Vorrang des Personalbeweises vor dem Urkundebeweis. Aber das staatanwaltschaftliche Vernehmungsprotokoll gemäß Art. 312 Abs. 1 schon zulässig, wenn der Angeklagter die Echtheit des Protokolls im Hauptverfahren bestätigt. Unzulässig ist das Protokoll, wenn seine Erklärung nicht von dem stammt, der in ihr als Beschuldigter bezeichnet ist. Bei dieser materiellen Echtheit des Vernehmungsprotokolls geht es somit im Kern um die Identitätsdiffernz bezüglich des Inhaltes, denn das erkennbare Inhalt der Urkunde ist ein anderer als der der Beschuldigter vor der Staatsanwalt bezeichneter. Auf die inhaltliche Richtigkeit der Urkunde kommt es in diesem Fall nicht an. Aber trotz der Zurückweisung der Echtheit vom Angeklagten im Hauptverfahren kann das staatsanwaltschaftliche Vernehmungsprotokoll dadurch als Beweis zulässig, dass sein Eichtheit durch Vorführung einer Bild-Ton-Aufzeichnung vom Ermittlungsprozess oder auf sonstigen objektiven Weisen bewiesen werden kann(Art. 312 Abs. 2). Es kommt nun darauf an, was man sich unter den Begriff der objektiven Weisen versteht. Ton-Aufnahme, Aussage der Dritter, Aussage der Ermittlungsbeamter, Nachprüfung der Handschrift usw. können nicht die hier genannte Bild-Ton-Aufzeichnung ersetzt werden. Die Methoden dieser ausnahmsweise Eichtheitsbewilligung kann auf jeden Fall „begrenzt„ zuverlässig sein, da die Mündlichkeit und Unmittelbarkeit der Beweisaufnahme durch das Gericht nach Ansicht des Gesetzgebers des neuen Strafprozessrechts eine bessere Gewähr für eine richtige Sachverhaltsfeststellung und Schutzrechte der Beschuldigter bietet.