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

    방법의 착오 = A study on ‘aberratio ictus’

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A75030227

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

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

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    This thesis considers a study on 'aberratio ictus', and especially in connection with the supreme court decision. We examined aberratio ictus and clearly shows difference of theories and practical affairs with reference to the point of a supreme court decision. In criminal law Irrtum is divided into Tatbestandsirrtum and Verbotsirrtum . Tatbestandsirrtum means there is discordance between things which a person knows subjectively and what actually occurs in a criminal act.
    As we have already shown, error in objecto and aberratio ictus have different structures. In addition there are opinions that because Konkretisierungstheorie has too small a scope to recognize Vorsatz, these opinions go against the general public's view point. But this criticism may be groundless if we can't give our approval in practical affairs, passing judgment according to common view point without considering theoretical validity and the law, as it stands. Versuch is grounds for fakultative Strafmilderung. Accordingly even if the problems are solved, Konkretisierungstheorie better supports Schuldprinzip
    It consists of three main parts.
    Ⅰ. The supreme court decision
    Ⅱ. A study on decision
    Ⅲ. Conclusion
    번역하기

    This thesis considers a study on 'aberratio ictus', and especially in connection with the supreme court decision. We examined aberratio ictus and clearly shows difference of theories and practical affairs with reference to the point of a supreme court...

    This thesis considers a study on 'aberratio ictus', and especially in connection with the supreme court decision. We examined aberratio ictus and clearly shows difference of theories and practical affairs with reference to the point of a supreme court decision. In criminal law Irrtum is divided into Tatbestandsirrtum and Verbotsirrtum . Tatbestandsirrtum means there is discordance between things which a person knows subjectively and what actually occurs in a criminal act.
    As we have already shown, error in objecto and aberratio ictus have different structures. In addition there are opinions that because Konkretisierungstheorie has too small a scope to recognize Vorsatz, these opinions go against the general public's view point. But this criticism may be groundless if we can't give our approval in practical affairs, passing judgment according to common view point without considering theoretical validity and the law, as it stands. Versuch is grounds for fakultative Strafmilderung. Accordingly even if the problems are solved, Konkretisierungstheorie better supports Schuldprinzip
    It consists of three main parts.
    Ⅰ. The supreme court decision
    Ⅱ. A study on decision
    Ⅲ. Conclusion

    더보기

    목차 (Table of Contents)

    • Ⅰ. 판 례 = 183
    • Ⅱ. 판례의 검토 = 184
    • 1. 구성요건적 착오 = 185
    • 2. 구성요건적 착오의 태양 = 186
    • 3. 방법의 착오와 고의의 成否에 관한 학설의 검토 = 188
    • Ⅰ. 판 례 = 183
    • Ⅱ. 판례의 검토 = 184
    • 1. 구성요건적 착오 = 185
    • 2. 구성요건적 착오의 태양 = 186
    • 3. 방법의 착오와 고의의 成否에 관한 학설의 검토 = 188
    • (1) 형법규정 = 188
    • (2) 학설의 검토 = 189
    • (3) 소결 = 197
    • Ⅲ.결 어 = 198
    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

    해외이동버튼