대망낭종 1례보고

신동룡,석홍 한림대학교의료원 1983 人間科學 Vol.7 No.11

인터넷상에서의 비영리적 저작권침해에 관한 형사처벌 연구

신동룡 연세법학회 2001 연세법학 Vol.8 No.1

In this article, I study on the criminalization of nonprofitable copyright infringement in the internet. Recently, the proliferation of digital technology make anyone commit major copyright infringement. Especially, through the widespread accessibility of copying technology, technology's ability to make perfect reproductions, and the development of the hacker culture, many internet users may infringe the copyright without seeking to make a profit. United State Copyright Act had limited the criminal penalties to willful, profit-seeking infringers. So traditional criminal copyright laws had been inapplicable to digital era. In 1997, however, the United States Congress expanded the scope of criminal copyright infringement law far beyond any previous attempts to curtail piracy. Specifically, Congress lowered the threshold for criminal copyright infringement through the passage of the No Electronic Theft (NET) Act. But, in spite of the change in technology, copyright law intend to realize the value of copyright which is the delicate balance between copyright owner's interests and public interests. In light of fair use doctrine, as we can see Eldred vs. Reno, the NET Act's stringent criminal penalties may break the delicate balance and prohibit the free flow of information in the digital world. And this act's lack of fair use exemptions could chill communication in the scientific community. Korean copyright acts can also criminalize the nonprofitable copyright infringement. But, as they don't define the extent of punishment, many of internet user could be more punished by copyright acts than NET Act's. I propose in this article that korean legislators should pay special attention to the delicate balance between copyright owner's interests and public interests, and must revise copyright acts

법담론에 있어서 자유주의와 공동체주의

신동룡 한국법철학회 2010 법철학연구 Vol.13 No.3

Liberalism-communitarianism debate has continued throughout history. It has many effects on the legal discourse. Liberalism is different from communitarianism in many conceptions: happiness, human nature, society and morality. Liberalism has an idea that human being is the individual, the possessive, the ecocentric, and the autonomous being. He has a power to pursuit of some happiness by himself. But he is not able to optimalize his happiness without the society, political community and law. Classical and Modern Liberalism detach the right from the good. And they separate the law from the morality. But communitarianism regards human being as the social being. In this reason, communitarianism think that the common good is enshrined in social practices and thus we are able to find sources of the principles of justice from it, while liberalism considers principles of justice as products of contracts among individuals of a society. This article studies how the legal discouses are connected with the liberalism and the communitarianism’s reasoning. For this work, I analyze ① legal reasoning’s patterns, ② the case of adultery, ③ a freedon of conscience and a conscientious objector, ④ the liberalist’s and com- munitarianist’s pre-understanding for legal interpretation, ⑤ the case of abortion and the bad Samaritan. Liberalism-communitarianism debate has continued throughout history. It has many effects on the legal discourse. Liberalism is different from communitarianism in many conceptions: happiness, human nature, society and morality. Liberalism has an idea that human being is the individual, the possessive, the ecocentric, and the autonomous being. He has a power to pursuit of some happiness by himself. But he is not able to optimalize his happiness without the society, political community and law. Classical and Modern Liberalism detach the right from the good. And they separate the law from the morality. But communitarianism regards human being as the social being. In this reason, communitarianism think that the common good is enshrined in social practices and thus we are able to find sources of the principles of justice from it, while liberalism considers principles of justice as products of contracts among individuals of a society. This article studies how the legal discouses are connected with the liberalism and the communitarianism’s reasoning. For this work, I analyze ① legal reasoning’s patterns, ② the case of adultery, ③ a freedon of conscience and a conscientious objector, ④ the liberalist’s and com- munitarianist’s pre-understanding for legal interpretation, ⑤ the case of abortion and the bad Samaritan.

북한의 집단주의 법원리와 권리-의무에 대한 법문학적 고찰

신동룡 한국법철학회 2009 법철학연구 Vol.12 No.2

Collectivism legal principle(CLP) is the basis of the social life and the rights-duties system in North Korea. The previous researchers have evaluated that the CLP is the totalism legal principle in a liberalist view point. But, they have committed an error which they didn’t consider the utterance-contexts of legal texts about CLP. Instead of the previous researchers’ external approach, this article analyzes the North Korea’s CLP and the rights-duties system in the internal-contextual approach. And this article uses the methodology of the Law & Literature, because we are able to know the Sollen-Sein aspects of their social norms and social life through the North Korea’s literary works. In this works, we can recognize that ① although the duties are prior to the rights in the CLP, ② collectivist’s rights are the foundation of the member’s happy life, ③ in this reason, the collectivist’s group must secure the member’s self-reliant rights, and ④ if the group is not faithful in the performance of its duties, the group must reconstruct its system in which the member can live self-reliantly, creatively, and consciously.

特許法理論에 對한 硏究

신동룡 중앙법학회 2006 中央法學 Vol.8 No.4

[논문]대화윤리와 저작권법

신동룡 한국법철학회 2006 법철학연구 Vol.9 No.1

Bakhtin's Dialogic Ethics and the Copyright Law

1980년대 이후 한국 법철학의 발전과 향후과제

신동룡 연세법학회 ( 구 연세법학연구회 ) 2006 연세법학 Vol.13 No.1

1980년대 이후 한국 법철학에 관한 연구 -이론과 쟁점을 중심으로-

신동룡 한국법철학회 2008 법철학연구 Vol.11 No.2

This article examines the accomplishment and assignment of the Korean law & philosopy(KLP) after 1980, especially its theoris and issues. To the mid 1980's, KLP hadn't developed excellently under a military dictatorship. Since 1987's democracy movement, KLP has fostered very quickly. Korean Association of Legal Philosophy, Korean Law & Society Association and Democratic Legal Studies Association have contributed to the KLP's development. They have studied the legal positivism, the theory of natural law, law & society, the legal culture studis, the radical theoy of law, the applied legal philosophy, the legal theoy, the postmodernism jurispudence, Luman's system theory and so on. Through these researches, they have wanted to realize a society of justice. They have strived for the solution to the recent social problem, for example, the medical-pharmaceutical dispute, the various NIMBI insistences, the female equality, the foreign workers problem, the environmental issues, the intellectual property law disputes as well as the democratic issues. And for the reflection to these hard cases, they have accomodated the theoris of Hart, Dworkin, Fuller, Radbruch, Habermas, Alexy and so on. They have been disposed to intergrate the inclusive legal positivism, Dworkin's legal principle theory, Radbruch's latter theory, and Alexy's optimum theory. Although KLP has meeted with many difficulties since 1980's, KLP has expanded the KLP's discoursive places. They have made efforts to discuss with lawyers, professors, and specialists. And they must persevere in their endeavors to the reproduction of law and philosophical discourses in Korean legal culture. This article examines the accomplishment and assignment of the Korean law & philosopy(KLP) after 1980, especially its theoris and issues. To the mid 1980's, KLP hadn't developed excellently under a military dictatorship. Since 1987's democracy movement, KLP has fostered very quickly. Korean Association of Legal Philosophy, Korean Law & Society Association and Democratic Legal Studies Association have contributed to the KLP's development. They have studied the legal positivism, the theory of natural law, law & society, the legal culture studis, the radical theoy of law, the applied legal philosophy, the legal theoy, the postmodernism jurispudence, Luman's system theory and so on. Through these researches, they have wanted to realize a society of justice. They have strived for the solution to the recent social problem, for example, the medical-pharmaceutical dispute, the various NIMBI insistences, the female equality, the foreign workers problem, the environmental issues, the intellectual property law disputes as well as the democratic issues. And for the reflection to these hard cases, they have accomodated the theoris of Hart, Dworkin, Fuller, Radbruch, Habermas, Alexy and so on. They have been disposed to intergrate the inclusive legal positivism, Dworkin's legal principle theory, Radbruch's latter theory, and Alexy's optimum theory. Although KLP has meeted with many difficulties since 1980's, KLP has expanded the KLP's discoursive places. They have made efforts to discuss with lawyers, professors, and specialists. And they must persevere in their endeavors to the reproduction of law and philosophical discourses in Korean legal culture.

자유주의적 저작권 담론의 성과와 한계에 대한 고찰

신동룡 한국법철학회 2005 법철학연구 Vol.8 No.1

주체사상 및 주체의 법이론 要解

신동룡 한국법철학회 2010 법철학연구 Vol.13 No.1

If we want South & North Korea unification, we must study North Korean’s legal system. In a view of the internal-contextual approach, we have to understand Juche Ideology and Juche’s legal theory through North Korean’s language. This article describes Juche Ideology and Juche’s legal theory, especially, ① the social being’s nature: the self-reliant, the creative, and the conscious, ② the social life for the collectivism: in the economical life, cultural-ethical life, political life, ③ the principle of equality and comradeship as a collectivist morality, ④ the importance of the instruction and organization programs, ⑤ the politics through the virtues of benevolence and excellence, ⑥ the socialist democracy, ⑦ the methods and forms for the socialist democratic operations against the bureaucracy, ⑧ the limit of the collectivist morality and the need of the law, ⑨ the functions of the law: the regulative, the executive and the cultivative function, ⑩ the rule of law for the socialism, ⑪ the collectivist liberty and the human rights, ⑫ the legal life for the socialism, ⑬ the collectivist legal reasoning. In spite of these works, this article has a problem not to describe the ideology of Great Leader.