현행법상 스와핑에 대한 법적 고찰 -스와핑 처벌에 관한 규제 논의를 중심으로- = A Legal Study about the Swappingin Accordance with the Law Now in Force -Focusing on the Regulation Discussion about Punishing the Swapping-

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Although the swapping have violated public morals, we dont` have any legal regulation about the swapping. So, I wrote whether we can control the swapping with legal regulation. Before I exhibit the regulation about the swapping, I made the practice about theoretical study. and I have made an observation about social discussion as well as punishment about swapping. Compared punishment with social recognition, I found the present foreign condition and the present foreign regulation formerly. After that, I compared punishment with social recognition and I want to find a possibility that I can do regulation about the swapping. Lastly, I went over the present a provision about the swapping and I will find that I can make laws. I have went over all of things related to the swapping. After years of consideration, I suggested that we must make laws about controling the swapping. The reason why I suggested making the laws is following reasons. First, the regulation about the code of civil procedure According to the law now in force, the civil law is ordained a monogamy saying that it is not polygamy. So, a public prosecutor can claim withdrawal of a case to a law court for keeping the marriage. In conformity to the existing law, a criminal conversation is punishable under Article 241 of the Criminal Code that it is necessary condition to having a victim`s complaint. But, almost swapping is that it is conducted under the agreement in exterior view. So, it is not adjusted under the law and also there is a bit chance to adjust enforce of crime. But if the swapping is done with the mutual agreement, it is not punishable under Article 324 of the Criminal Code. To protect the benefit and protection of the law, I suggest that it must be made a provision through making the swapping of crime. Because the marriage is private field, the nation can not control that. But, to protect public order, we can discuss the swapping about a administrational system. I have gone over swapping focussing on regulation and making provision. It is basic right and important to protect civil liberties and sexual decisive power by themselves is also. It is written by the constitution that say The civil liberties is not disturbed against someone. But, it is important to keep good public morals and the benefit and protection of the law. The swapping is not used to all of the people and social customs. To keep the benefit and protection of the law and the cause of justice, I am just suggesting making new provision now.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 이재상, "형법총론" 박영사 2008

2 한국법률정보, "헌법재판소 판례집" 2007

3 최갑선, "헌법 제36조 제1항에 의한 혼인과 가족생활의 보장" 14 : 2003

4 정회철, "헌법" 여산출판사 2008

5 홍정선, "행정법총론" 박영사 2008

6 박균성, "행정법론(상)" 박영사 2006

7 "한겨례신문"

8 김주수, "친족상속법" 법문사 2008

9 "주간조선"

10 통계청, "인구동태조사" 2007

11 김민중, "이혼판례" 법원공보사 2001

12 박동섭, "실무가사소송" 법률문화원 2001

13 고시면, "수사상 인터넷매체 등을 통한 소위 ‘스와핑’에 있어서 형사처벌의 여부" 수사연구 2007

14 에리히 프롬, "소유냐 존재냐" 까치글방 2008

15 윤가현, "성문화와 심리" 학지사 2006

16 오선성, "성도덕에 관한 죄" 6 : 1992

17 왕가일, "성과 문화" 가람기획 2001

18 윤가현, "성,그 억압과 진보의 역사" 살림출판사 2006

19 사법연수원, "민사실무Ⅰ" 2007

20 김영배, "민법강의" 신조사 2008

21 "문화일보"

22 Armour,Richard Willard, "모든 것은 섹스로부터 시작되었다" 시공사 2001

23 "동아일보"

24 법원행정처, "대법원판례해설" 2007

25 "국민일보"

26 사법연수원, "가족법연구" 2007