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

    미국 형사법상 범의(Mens Rea)와 엄격책임(Strict Liability)에 관한 고찰 = Graduate School Student Thesis : Study on Mens Rea and Strict Liability of Criminal Law in America

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A76566471

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

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

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    One of the unique concepts of the American criminal law that cannot be found in Korean criminal law is strict liability, which imposes liability even in the absence of mens rea regarding one or more elements of a crime. Strict liability had initially appeared for the effective execution of regulatory criminal law, which had proliferated based on legal positivism in mid-19th century. However, with the rise of judicial activism and legal realism in the 20th century, the cases of the Supreme Court and statutory law, emphasizing the requirement of mens rea, are gradually confining strict liability within narrower limits. Strict liability offenses are generally violations for which only fines can be imposed. These crimes are characterized by danger to public welfare, practical difficulty of proving the element of mens rea and the abundance of expected prosecution. Although the issue of constitutionality regarding the violation of due process and the issue of practicality questioning whether there is a deterrent effect are being raised, much of the law and many cases still acknowledge the existence of strict liability. Although the discussion of adopting strict liability in Korean criminal law does not hold much significance because of different legal system and doctrine, strict liability is suggestive to our discussion about newly arisenissues such as administrative penalty, ignorance of law and burden of proof.
    번역하기

    One of the unique concepts of the American criminal law that cannot be found in Korean criminal law is strict liability, which imposes liability even in the absence of mens rea regarding one or more elements of a crime. Strict liability had initially ...

    One of the unique concepts of the American criminal law that cannot be found in Korean criminal law is strict liability, which imposes liability even in the absence of mens rea regarding one or more elements of a crime. Strict liability had initially appeared for the effective execution of regulatory criminal law, which had proliferated based on legal positivism in mid-19th century. However, with the rise of judicial activism and legal realism in the 20th century, the cases of the Supreme Court and statutory law, emphasizing the requirement of mens rea, are gradually confining strict liability within narrower limits. Strict liability offenses are generally violations for which only fines can be imposed. These crimes are characterized by danger to public welfare, practical difficulty of proving the element of mens rea and the abundance of expected prosecution. Although the issue of constitutionality regarding the violation of due process and the issue of practicality questioning whether there is a deterrent effect are being raised, much of the law and many cases still acknowledge the existence of strict liability. Although the discussion of adopting strict liability in Korean criminal law does not hold much significance because of different legal system and doctrine, strict liability is suggestive to our discussion about newly arisenissues such as administrative penalty, ignorance of law and burden of proof.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 박상기, "형법총론" 박영사 2009

    2 이재상, "형법총론" 박영사 2007

    3 조훈, "위법성 인식으로서의 mens rea" 5 (5): 2003

    4 박상진, "영미형법에 있어 주관적 범죄요건(Mens Rea)에 대한 연구" 한국비교형사법학회 9 (9): 409-428, 2007

    5 박강우, "영미형법상 엄격책임의 이해" 한국형사정책연구원 18 (18): 247-264, 2007

    6 장규원, "미국 모범형법전에 대한 고찰" 한국비교형사법학회 9 (9): 459-476, 2007

    7 金 載 潤, "現代刑法에 있어 擧證責任轉換의 許容限界에 對한 考察" 한국법학원 (86) : 122-139, 2005

    8 Joshua Dressler, "Understanding Criminal Law" Lexis Pub. 2001

    9 Frank J. Reminton, "The mental Element in cCrime" 1952

    10 Henry M. Hart, "The Aim of the Criminal Law" 23 : 1958

    1 박상기, "형법총론" 박영사 2009

    2 이재상, "형법총론" 박영사 2007

    3 조훈, "위법성 인식으로서의 mens rea" 5 (5): 2003

    4 박상진, "영미형법에 있어 주관적 범죄요건(Mens Rea)에 대한 연구" 한국비교형사법학회 9 (9): 409-428, 2007

    5 박강우, "영미형법상 엄격책임의 이해" 한국형사정책연구원 18 (18): 247-264, 2007

    6 장규원, "미국 모범형법전에 대한 고찰" 한국비교형사법학회 9 (9): 459-476, 2007

    7 金 載 潤, "現代刑法에 있어 擧證責任轉換의 許容限界에 對한 考察" 한국법학원 (86) : 122-139, 2005

    8 Joshua Dressler, "Understanding Criminal Law" Lexis Pub. 2001

    9 Frank J. Reminton, "The mental Element in cCrime" 1952

    10 Henry M. Hart, "The Aim of the Criminal Law" 23 : 1958

    11 Richard A. Wasserstorm, "Strict Liability in the Criminal Law" 1960

    12 Francis Bowes Sayre, "Public welfare Offenses" 33 : 1933

    13 Richard G. Singer, "Of Innocence and Innocents" 1999

    14 Wayne R, "Morden Criminal Law" Thomson / West 2006

    15 Herbert L. Packer, "Mens Rea and the Supreme Court" 1962

    16 Gerhard O. W. Mueller, "Mens Rea and the Law Without It" 58 : 1995

    17 Jerome Hall, "General Principles of Criminal Law" The Lawbook Exchange,LTD. 2005

    18 Richard G. Singer, "Encyclopedia of Crime & Justice 4-Strict Liability" GaleGroup 2001

    19 Paul H. Robinson, "Element Analysis in Defining Criminal Liability: The Model Penal Code and Beyond" 35 : 1983

    20 Wayne R. LaFave, "Criminal Law" Thomson / West 2003

    21 Richard G. Singer, "Criminal Law" Aspen Publishers 2007

    22 Alan C. Michaels, "Constitutional Innocence" 1999

    23 Joshua Dressler, "Cases and Materials on Criminal Law" Thomson/West 2007

    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
    2027 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2021-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2018-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2015-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2013-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (기타) KCI등재후보
    2012-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (기타) KCI등재후보
    2011-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보2차) KCI등재후보
    2009-06-18 학회명변경 한글명 : 법학연구소 -> 법학연구원 KCI등재후보
    2009-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2007-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 0.8 0.8 0.78
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.66 0.71 0.893 0.18
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼