RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    양벌규정의 문제점 및 개선방안

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A76370277

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    According to the overflowing of the administrative penal provisions, there are about 350 joint penal provisions and they're rapidly increasing together with the enactment of the administrative act. But there is no clear basis between the law with joint penal provisions and the law without joint penal provisions. In case of the administrative punishment including joint penal provisions checks the sanction of the administrative law violation and the comprehensive system of the administrative sanction for a duty realization under the administration. And that sanction method shouldn't be excessive, also meets the case, and has a effect to control the violation of law. For ensuring the effectiveness must avoid the over sanction, it is the problem that the sanction can't control the illegality restraint, because of the weak sanction. The joint penal provisions basically pursue the fundamental right's guarantee and the administrative object's achievement. The type of the standing joint penal provisions imposes a fine on the corporation as same as the offender. and this is the most general legislation type.
    But if the joint penal provisions are unified by the basic type without the immune provision, the party's legal position will be weak, and the corporation will be slightly punished, because the corporation's fine is the same as the offender's. Considering this problem, we should enact that the corporation's punishment don't connect with person's punishment. And it is necessary that the diverse immune provisions should be connected with the joint penal provisions.
    번역하기

    According to the overflowing of the administrative penal provisions, there are about 350 joint penal provisions and they're rapidly increasing together with the enactment of the administrative act. But there is no clear basis between the law with join...

    According to the overflowing of the administrative penal provisions, there are about 350 joint penal provisions and they're rapidly increasing together with the enactment of the administrative act. But there is no clear basis between the law with joint penal provisions and the law without joint penal provisions. In case of the administrative punishment including joint penal provisions checks the sanction of the administrative law violation and the comprehensive system of the administrative sanction for a duty realization under the administration. And that sanction method shouldn't be excessive, also meets the case, and has a effect to control the violation of law. For ensuring the effectiveness must avoid the over sanction, it is the problem that the sanction can't control the illegality restraint, because of the weak sanction. The joint penal provisions basically pursue the fundamental right's guarantee and the administrative object's achievement. The type of the standing joint penal provisions imposes a fine on the corporation as same as the offender. and this is the most general legislation type.
    But if the joint penal provisions are unified by the basic type without the immune provision, the party's legal position will be weak, and the corporation will be slightly punished, because the corporation's fine is the same as the offender's. Considering this problem, we should enact that the corporation's punishment don't connect with person's punishment. And it is necessary that the diverse immune provisions should be connected with the joint penal provisions.

    더보기

    목차 (Table of Contents)

    • Ⅰ. 머리말
    • Ⅱ. 법인의 범죄능력과 양벌규정
    • Ⅲ. 양벌규정에 관한 기본적 고찰
    • Ⅳ. 양벌규정의 문제점
    • Ⅴ. 양벌규정에 관한 개선방안
    • Ⅰ. 머리말
    • Ⅱ. 법인의 범죄능력과 양벌규정
    • Ⅲ. 양벌규정에 관한 기본적 고찰
    • Ⅳ. 양벌규정의 문제점
    • Ⅴ. 양벌규정에 관한 개선방안
    • Ⅵ. 맺음말
    • 〈Abstract〉
    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2026 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2020-11-20 학회명변경 한글명 : 행정법이론실무학회(行政法理論實務學會) -> 행정법이론실무학회
    영문명 : Korea Administrative Law And Practice Association(약칭 Kalpa) -> Korea Administrative Law And Practice Association(약칭 KALPA)
    KCI등재
    2020-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2017-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2013-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2010-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2008-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2005-05-30 학술지명변경 한글명 : 행정법연구(行政法硏究) -> 행정법연구 KCI등재
    2005-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2004-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2003-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 1.61 1.61 1.39
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    1.31 1.37 1.384 0.57
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼