양형조사법안에 대한 비판적 고찰 = A critical Study on the Bills of Sentencing Investigation

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

We need to consider the following when we discuss the ways to improve the sentencing investigation system and legislative study for it.
First, when we discuss the problems of the sentencing investigation system and the ways to improve it, it is necessary to consider that the number of the probation officer is not enough for pre-prosecution investigation, pre-sentencing investigation, probation work and sentencing investigation. And the probation officer’s preprosecution investigation, pre-sentencing investigation and probation work need professionalism, but sentencing investigation by investigator needs the justice of the investigation into objective facts. So if the probation officer and investigator’s work are divided up efficiently for professionalism and specialty, the repetitious work done by different departments and the waste of human resources will be avoided. We will need to discuss the sentencing investigation system on the premise those things.
Second, it is necessary to revise the criminal procedure act and the probation law for dividing up the probation officer and investigator’s job efficiently. In other words we need to make legal ground about the contents, means and procedures of the investigator’s sentencing investigation system in the criminal procedure act. It is necessary to divide up the work by revising the probation law as follows; the probation officer should carry on the pre-prosecution investigation, the pre-sentencing investigation and the probation work. And the investigator should carry on the sentencing investigation.
Third, because the current number of investigators is not enough for the demand of the sentencing investigation according to the implementation of the sentencing guidelines, it is necessary to recruit enough manpower. Also it is important to hire enough probation officers continuously through the appropriate demand survey because there are probation officer shortages for pre-prosecution investigation, pre-sentencing investigation and probation works.
In conclusion, the investigators should be let carry out the sentencing investigation by revising the criminal procedure law for applying the sentencing guidelines rightly. Also the probation officers should be able to execute the pre-sentencing investigation, the probation work and the pre-prosecution investigation by revising the probation law. In other words, the pre-sentencing investigation system and the sentencing investigation system should be separated. Because there is a difference in the task characteristics in both systems. And there are not enough human resources and infrastructure.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 시작하는 말
• Ⅱ. 양형조사제도에 대한 비교법적 검토
• Ⅲ. 최근의 입법적 논의에 대한 검토
• Ⅳ. 맺는 말
• 〈참고문헌〉
• 〈Abstract〉

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 손동권, "형사소송법" 2010

2 장영민, "현행 소년법의 문제점과 개선방안" 법학연구소 10 (10): 73-102, 2005

3 승재현, "합리적인 양형을 위한 양형 조사 방안 - 양형 조사 주체 및 소속기관을 중심으로 -" 법조협회 59 (59): 98-151, 2010

4 최석윤, "한국의 소년분류심사제도에 관한 연구" 한국비교형사법학회 10 (10): 719-742, 2008

5 최석윤, "프랑스형법의 양형전조사에 대한 토론문" 법학전문대학원협의회․법무부 2010

6 김혜정, "판결전조사제도의 현황과 개선방안 - 성인범에 대한 판결전조사제도를 중심으로 -" 한국형사정책연구원 2002

7 이상철, "판결전조사제도에 관한 연구" 한국형사정책연구원 1994

8 최석윤, "판결전조사제도" 12 (12): 2000

9 이상철, "일본의 판결전 조사제도 도입 시도 당시의 논의 내용 및 그 이후의 상황, 외국의 양형제도연구" 법원행정처 2003

10 권오걸, "영국양형제도의 분석과 국내도입의 문제점 검토" 한국형사정책연구원 19 (19): 157-192, 2008

11 법원행정처 사법정책실, "양형조사와 양형심리절차"

12 한영수, "양형자료조사제도의 도입과 양형데이터베이스 시스템의 구축" 2005

13 김재봉, "양형자료조사에 관한 비교법적 고찰" 법학연구소 23 (23): 1-22, 2006

14 천진호, "양형기준제 시행의 문제점과 양형자료 조사제도 도입을 위한 제언" 한국형사법학회 21 (21): 251-272, 2009

15 류전철, "양형결정의 정당화에 관한 고찰" 한국형사정책연구원 17 (17): 939-960, 2006

16 배종대, "신형사소송법" 2009

17 정승환, "신형사소송법" 홍문사 2008

18 오영근, "소년사건 처리절차의 개선방안에 관한 연구" 한국형사정책연구원 1994

19 법무부, "서독의 사법질서" 117 : 1989

20 김일수, "바람직한 양형조사주체 및 조사방식에 관한 연구, 대검찰청 용역과제 보고서" 2009

21 송광섭, "바람직한 양형조사의 주체에 관한 논의 상황" 법학전문대학원협의회․법무부 2010

22 이주형, "바람직한 양형조사의 주체 및 양형조사 방안에 관한 토론문" 법학전문대학원협의회․법무부 2010

23 이동조, "독일의 사법보조제도, 외국의 양형제도연구" 법원행정처 2003

24 남영찬, "독일에서의 양형사실조사방법, In 외국의 양형제도연구" 법원행정처 2003

25 김혜정, "개정법률안에 도입된 양형자료조사제도에 관한 검토" 한국형사법학회 (26) : 409-428, 2006

26 John P. Storm, "What United States Probation Officers Do, In Federal Probation, 1997 Karl Peters, Strafprozeß, 4. Aufl."

27 Thomas J. Wolf, "What United States Pretrial Services Officers Do, Federal Probation" 1997

28 Alvin W. Cohn, "The Presentense Investigation Report : An Old Saw With New Teeth" 1990

29 Jerry D. Denzling, "The Federal Probation Officer : Life Before and After Guideline Sentencing, Federal Probation" 1991

30 Charles L. Chute, "The Development of Probation in The United States" Arno Press 1974

31 Kühne, "Strafprozeßlehre, 3. Aufl" 1988

32 Howard Abadinsky, "Probation and Parole, Theory and Practice(3rd Edition)" Prentice-Hall 1987

33 Harry E. Allen, "Probation and Parole in America"

34 Christophe Petiteau, "Pre-sentencing Inquiries in French Criminal Law" 법학전문대학원협의회․법무부 2010

35 Home Office, "National Standards for the Supervision of Offenders in the Community"

36 Hubertus Lange, "Geschichtliche Entwicklung, Nachkriegssituation und Aufbauphase der Gerichtshilfe, Straffälligenhilfe in Geschicht und Gegenwart"

37 Probation statistics quarterly brief January to March, "England and Wales"

38 Renschler-Delcker, "Die Gerichtshilfe in der Praxis der Strafrechtspflege"

39 Hörster, "Die (soziale) Gerichtshilfe zur Persönlichkeitserforschung"

40 Philip Plowden, "Criminal Litigation in Practice" Northumbria Law Press 2006

41 Rolando V. del Carmen, "CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - Law and Practice -, THIRD EDITION" 1995

42 법무부, "2010 판결전조사 성과분석" 2010