새로운 범죄현상과 형사법의 현대적 과제 양형기준의 합리성 검토와 개선방향 = Improvement direction of Sentencing Guidelines and an Examination of Its Rationality

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Recently great attention has been shown to the question of sentencing guidelines. an unfair sentencing deviation and a paternalistic judicial decision raised a discussion about sentencing guidelines. Under the Supreme Court, the Sentencing Commission was established on May 2, 2007 with a purpose to implement fair and objective sentencing practices, which the public can respect and trust. The Commission, which is independent of its role, is provided with the authority to establish or revise the sentencing guidelines and may conduct research and deliberate sentencing policy. In 2009 Sentencing Committee established guidelines of 8 crimes which are homicide, sex, bribe, robbery etc. The sentencing guidelines may not be legally binding but must be respected by the judges in rendering decisions as which to the category and period of sentencing should be involved. This paper examines the problem of Sentencing Guidelines, particularly of the improvement direction of Sentencing Guidelines and an examination of Its rationality. Before going on with the question of an examination of Its rationality, it should be mentioned that the contents of a Sentencing Guidelines. Sentencing is consistent when offenders committing similar offences are punished with similar penalties by different sentencers, whether those sentencers sit in the same court or different courts. That is not to say that there is a right sentence for every offence. Treating like cases alike does not mean treating them in exactly the same way. Sentencing is neither a scientific nor a mechanistic process. A large number of different circumstances can legitimately be taken into account by sentencers. It is insufficient to slove the Sentencing Guidelines gap due to the broad sentence range problems and there are no mandatory effect in the Sentencing Guidelines. When establish the sentencing guidelines, the limited normatives are so vague thus It`s problems should be solved through an additory study.