‘피고인이 구속된 때’의 의미 - 대법원 2024. 5. 21. 선고 2021도6357 전원합의체 판결을 중심으로 -

조현욱 가천대학교 법학연구소 2024 가천법학 Vol.17 No.3

This Article goes on the meaning of “When the criminal defendant is placed under detention”in Article 33 Paragraph 1, Subparagrph 1 of Criminal Procedure Act. Article 33 Paragraph 1, Subparagrph 1 of Criminal Procedure Act stipulates “when the criminal defendant is placed under detention” as one of the grounds on which the court shall appoint a defense counsel ex officio when the criminal defendant does not have a defense counsel (hereinafter the “compulsory ground for the appointment of a court-appointed defense counsel”). The Supreme Court has ruled that “when the criminal defendant is placed under detention” as referred to in Article 33(1)1 of the Criminal Procedure Act refers to where the criminal defendant is under detention and being tried in the relevant criminal case in that the original purpose of the detention system is to place the criminal defendant under physical restraint according to the requirements and procedures prescribed by law to secure the progress of a criminal lawsuit and the execution of punishment and does not include where the criminal defendant is under detention in a separate case, not in the relevant criminal case, or the criminal defendant is in prison after a judgment of guilt is finally affirmed in another criminal case (hereinafter “legal principles of previous precedents”). In this paper, we first looked at the concept of the permissible meaning and possible meaning of the legal text and analyzed the Supreme Court Decisions that drew different conclusions even though they used the same standard of ‘possible meaning’ of the legal text. Through this, the conclusion is limited to the target decision, and it is based on the legal principle of previous precedents, which holds that 'when the defendant is arrested' in Article 33, Paragraph 1, Subparagrph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act means when the defendant is detained and tried in the relevant criminal case. The government also presented its position that there were no significant problems in resolving the subject matter. As a solution to expand the scope of detention suggested by the majority opinion of the target decision, a legislative theory was presented to revise Article 33 Paragraph 1, Subparagrph 1 of Criminal Procedure Act, referring to Article 140, Paragraph 1, Subparagrph 5 of the German Criminal Procedure Act.

폭행죄의 상습성 유무 판단 방법과 죄수 - 대법원 2018. 4. 24. 선고 2017도10956 판결 -

조현욱 대검찰청 2019 형사법의 신동향 Vol.0 No.63

According to the criteria for recidivism of Supreme Court case, when the defendant has a previous conviction of violence, and since the requirements such as the interval and frequency of time are met, the recidivism of violence is recognized. In the Subject case, the mother is naturally lineal ascendant, but Stepfather is not a blood family, and is not a lineal ascendant because it is merely relatives by affinity as relative's spouse. According to Supreme Court's criteria, the applicable laws and punishments will be the same regardless of whether or not the parent have been repeatedly assaulted, It is absurd in point. Considering the Article 264 of the Criminal Act and the specificity of the assault charge of committing assault on the constitutional requirement, the crime of habitual lineal ascendant Violence shall be established with a "Habit of Crime of lineal ascendant Violence". Crime of habitual lineal ascendant Violence and crime of lineal ascendant Violence is not a comprehensive crime but another separate crime. It is reasonable that the judgments of Court of first and second Instance. The Regulations of Habitual Crimes seem to be in the strictest sense, but not necessarily in actual punishment. For example, whether it's habitual or concurrent crimes, the scope of punishment of both types will be the same. Therefore, the purpose and meaning of the punishment rule for the realization of special prevention through strict punishment will be greatly diminished. In relation to Res Judicata, when treated as habitual crimes, the defendant is more likely to be disposed of more generously than when treated as concurrent crimes. I think that it is appropriate to treat as concurrent crimes, so that the problem of the Res Judicata can be solved without any difficulty. In addition, even if there is no provision for heavy penalties for habitual crimes, in the case of an actor or a habitual offender who tends to repeat the offense regardless of the number of offenses or the means and method of the offense, reasonable punishment for habitual offenders is possible after Article 51 of the Criminal Act. Even if follwing the jurisprudence of inclusive crimes and recidivism suggested by the Supreme Court, the Subject case will be corrected. And the prosecution will have to escape from the existing practice of prosecuting for inclusive crimes under the Supreme Court precedents, furthermore, it will be possible to develop a new theory of habitual crimes. 대상판결은 폭행의 습벽이 있는 피고인이 상습으로 계부 甲을 폭행하고, 친모 乙을 1회 존속폭행한 사안을 다루고 있다. 피고인에게 폭력전과가 있고 시간의 간격이나 빈도 등 판례와 학설에서 요구하는 상습성 요건을 충족하고 있으므로, 폭행의 상습성은 인정된다. 대상판결에서 친모 乙은 당연히 직계존속에 해당하나, 계부 甲은 피를 함께 나눈 혈족도 아니며 단지 친족의 배우자인 인척관계에 불과할 뿐이어서 직계존속에 해당하지 않는다. 대법원판례에 의하면, 부모 모두를 상습폭행한 경우든 대상판결의 사안처럼 부모 중 1인에 대해서만 상습폭행한 경우든 상관없이 그 적용법률과 처벌도 동일해 진다는 점에서 불합리하다. 형법 제264조의 규정형식과 신분관계를 구성요건으로 하는 존속폭행죄의 특수성 등을 고려할 때, 상습존속폭행죄는 ‘존속폭행의 습벽’이 있어야 성립한다. 따라서 피고인의 계부 甲에 대한 존속폭행의 습벽을 부정하면서 상습존속폭행죄와 상습폭행죄는 포괄일죄가 아닌 별개의 범죄이고, 피해자 계부 甲이 피고인의 직계존속이 아닌 이상 상습폭행죄가 인정될 뿐 신분관계를 필요로 하는 상습존속폭행죄는 성립할 수 없다고 본 대상판결 제1심과 제2심법원의 판단이 타당하다. 상습범 규정이 엄벌주의에 적합해 보이나, 실제 처벌에 있어서는 반드시 그런 것은 아니다. 예컨대 A 폭행행위, B 폭행행위 및 C 폭행행위를 상습범으로 묶으면 상습폭행죄로서 폭행죄 법정형의 1/2을 가중(형법 제264조)하게 되고, 이들을 모두 경합범으로 처리해도 폭행죄 법정형의 1/2을 가중(형법 제38조 제1항 제2호)하게 된다. 결국 양자의 처단형범위가 동일하게 된다는 점에서, 엄벌을 통한 특별예방의 실현이라는 상습범 규정의 입법취지와 의미는 상당부분 퇴색될 수밖에 없다. 또한 A 폭행행위와 B 폭행행위만 먼저 기소되어 확정판결을 받은 후 C 폭행행위가 발각되어 기소된 경우에 포괄일죄설에 따르면 C 폭행행위에 대하여 면소판결을 선고해야 하나, 경합범설에 따르면 C 폭행행위에 대하여는 면소판결이 선고될 수 없고 형이 감경 또는 면제될 수 있을 뿐이다. 즉, 상습범으로 처리하게 되면 경합범으로 처리하는 경우에 비해 피고인은 더 관대한 처분을 받게 된다. 생각건대 대상판결 사안은 경합범으로 처리하는 것이 타당하며, 이렇게 함으로써 기판력 문제도 무리 없이 해결될 수 있을 것이다. 나아가 설령 상습범에 대한 가중처벌규정이 없더라도, 범행의 횟수나 범행의 수단과 방법 등을 고려할 때 어느 누가 봐도 범행을 반복하는 경향이 있는 행위자 또는 상습범이 분명한 경우에는 형법 제51조(양형의 조건)에 의해 상습범에 대한 합당한 처벌이 가능하다. 대법원이 기존에 제시한 포괄일죄 및 상습범 법리에 따르더라도 대상판결은 시정되어야 할 것으로 판단되며, 검찰도 대법원판례에 따라 포괄일죄로 기소하는 기존관행에서 벗어나야 새로운 상습범 법리를 개발할 수 있을 것이다.

A Case of Isolated Thyroid Stimilating Hormone Deficiency

조현욱,김여주,김상진 순천향대학교 순천향의학연구소 2012 Journal of Soonchunhyang Medical Science Vol.18 No.2

Isolated thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) deficiency is very rare. Only a few patients are reported in the world. A 50-year-old woman was admitted to Soonchunhyang University Cheonan Hospital because of a distal radius fracture. She was diagnosed with hypothyroidism incidentally. Serum free T4 and TSH were low. After administration of exogenous TSH releasing hormone, no TSH response was noted. The response of prolactin and other pituitary hormones were appropriate after stimulation. Pituitary magnetic resonance image did not reveal any abnormalities. The diagnosis of isolated TSH deficiency was established for this patient.

위임받은 금액을 초과한 현금인출과 컴퓨터등사용사기죄

조현욱 한국비교형사법학회 2006 비교형사법연구 Vol.8 No.1

Die absprachewidrig uberschreitete Bargeldsummebei der Abhebung und Computerbetrug

그룹 스케줄링의 효율성에 관한 연구

조현욱,권영훈 경남대학교 산업경영연구소 2008 지역산업연구 Vol.31 No.1

동물보호법 제10조(동물학대 등의 금지)의 문제점과 개선방안

조현욱 (사)한국동물법연구회 2024 동물법연구 Vol.0 No.6

지금까지 동물 학대에 대한 논의는 끊임없이 이어지고 있으며, 동물 학대를 방지하기 위한 입법적 노력의 성과물이 현행 동물보호법이라고 할 수 있다. 이런 노력에도 불구하고 학대 사건은 계속 증가하고 있으며, 새로운 유형의 동물 학대도 발생하고 있다. 이에 본 논문에서는 동물보호법 제정 이래 동물학대 관련 규정의 개정과정에서 나타난 동물 학대 개념과 유형을 살펴보고, 나타난 문제점을 해결하기 위해 고의학대행위만 처벌하는 방안, 동물 학대 개념을 “동물에게 육체적·정신적 고통을 가하는 일체의 행위”로 정의하는 방안, 맹견유기행위는 동물학대행위와는 구별되는 개념이므로 이를 별도로 규정하는 방안, 동물학대행위와 이에 대한 벌칙(형벌)을 하나의 조문에 함께 규정하는 방안 등을 제시하였다. 또한 애니멀 호딩과 동물에 대한 성적 학대행위의 동물 학대 범주에 포함 여부를 살펴본 다음 이를 포함시킬 수 있는 방안을 제시하였다. 다음으로 동물에 대한 학대행위를 금지하고자 한다면, 형법적 관점에서 동물학대죄의 보호법익에 대한 논의가 선결되어야 한다는 주장도 있어 그 보호법익에 대해서도 살펴보았다. Until now, discussions on animal abuse have continued, and the current Animal Protection Act can be said to be the result of legislative efforts to prevent animal abuse. Despite these efforts, incidents of abuse continue to increase, and new types of animal abuse are also occurring. Accordingly, in this paper, we examine the concept and types of animal abuse that have appeared in the process of revising animal abuse-related regulations since the enactment of the Animal Protection Act. In order to solve the problems that have emerged, we propose a plan to punish only intentional cruelty, and the concept of animal abuse as “physical and mental harm to animals.” A plan to define it as “any act that causes pain,” a plan to define the act of abandoning a vicious dog separately as it is a distinct concept from an act of animal abuse, and a plan to stipulate the act of animal abuse and the penalties for it together in one article. presented. In addition, we examined whether animal hoarding and sexual abuse of animals were included in the category of animal abuse, and then suggested ways to include them. Next, some argue that if one wants to prohibit cruelty to animals, a discussion on the protective legal interests of animal cruelty crimes must be discussed first from a criminal law perspective, so the protective legal interests were also examined.

西北學會의 愛國啓蒙運動(Ⅰ) : <西友>·<西北學會月報>의 內容과 現實認識

趙顯旭 淑明女子大學校 1995 韓國學硏究 Vol.5 No.-

信賴의 原則

趙顯旭 건국대학교 1984 政法論叢 Vol.19 No.1

폭력행위 등 처벌에 관한 법률 제2조제2항(야간협박죄)에 있어서 협박의 기수 시기

조현욱 가야대학교 2003 가야대학교 논문집 Vol.12 No.-

Die vorliegende Arbeit befaßt sich die Rechtsprechung des koreanischen Oberstgerichtshofes (beurteilt vom 2002.12.10, 2002 do 4940). Diese Entscheidung zeigt, wann die Vollendung der Nacht-Bedrohung ist. Wenn die bedrohliche Tathandlung in der Nacht angeht, und die am Tag beendet, wann die Vollendung ist. Die meisten Rechtswissenschaftler sehen die Bedrohung als Verletzungsdelikt, die minder Meinung als Gefa¨hrdungsdelikt. Hier liegt die Frage, worin die Vollendung einer solchen Bedrohung besteht und nach welcher Meinung sie zu beurteilen ist. Daru¨ber gibt es 2 verschiedene Meinungen, z.B. Theorie der Bedrohung als Verletzungsdelikt und Theorie der Bedrohung als Gefa¨hrdungsdelikt. Wenn man die erste Meinung angeht, die oben genannante Entscheidung gar keine Nacht-Bedrohung ist, und nur als allgemeine Bedrohung strafbar. Wenn die zweite, eine Nacht-Bedrohung schon vollendet und als Nacht-Bedrohung strafbar. Ich bin fu¨r die erste Meinung. Es ist ja bedeutungsvoll, weil die oben genannante Entscheidung den Vollendungszeitpunkt und die Strafbarkeit der Nacht-Bedrohung sehr eng sieht. Ich schlage jetzt vor, eine neue Ordnung "Nacht-Bedrohung" im StGB zu regeln. Was den Gang der Arbeit betrifft, so gliedert sich die Untersuchung in 3 Abschnitte. 1. Problemstellung 2. Allgemeines der Bedrohung 3. Schlußbemerkung

피해자진술의 신빙성 판단기준으로써의 성인지 감수성

조현욱 동의대학교 지방자치연구소 2023 공공정책연구 Vol.40 No.2

In the case of sexual assault crime trials, there is a tendency to consider the victim’s side based on the abstract concept of Gender Sensitivity. In the future, when judging sexual crimes, in the case of rape (Article 297 of the Criminal Act), the criteria for determining whether or not assault or threat exists will be judged not from the viewpoint of the general public, but from the viewpoint of the victim linked to Gender Sensitivity. It is a welcome thing to make a judgment in consideration of the victim’s point of view. However, if this judgment continues without clearly establishing the concept of Gender Sensitivity, the possibility of being punished as a sexual crime increases if only some of the constituent requirements are met from the perspective of Gender Sensitivity. This is contrary to the last resort or supplementary principle of criminal law, and can face criticism that it does not conform to the principle of presumption of innocence and the principle of trial of evidence, which are the major principles of criminal law. In order to protect the victim’s right to sexual self-determination more objectively and effectively with Gender Sensitivity in the trial of sexual violence crimes, it is necessary to establish a basis as a universal rule of thumb for the average viewpoint of the victim, which is the criterion for the judgment.