RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
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
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      위험사회의 등장에 따른 형법의 대응 = Countermeasures of the Criminal Law in Accordance with Appearance of "Risikogesellschaft"

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A76465741

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

        This study examined countermeasures of the Criminal Law in accordance with appearance of "Risikogesellschaft". The social risk that characterizedmodern society had much value after Ulich Beck, German sociologist, suggested concept of "Risikogesellschaft". These days, the concept of Risikogesellschaft was generally accepted by not only the areas of sociology and philosophy but also the area of criminology. Great risk still existed from objective point of view and unrest was produced every day from subjective point of view: The concept of Risikogesellschaft required changes at roles and functions of the Criminal Law. The terminologies of "risk" and "risk society" were actively said at the social discourse including media so that the Criminal Law discussed countermeasures.<BR>  The discussion was as follows:<BR>  Firstly, the paper examined basic idea of risk-society as well as Risikostrafrecht based on risk-society. Active role change of the Criminal Law at risk-society was required to start discussion as follow:<BR>  Secondly, the paper examined concrete issues of conflict phenomenon between traditional criminal law and so called Risikostrafrecht. The issue could be classified into committing a crime at precedent stage and symbolic legislation to have a problem of Risikostrafrecht.<BR>  Thirdly, alternative proposals to overcome risk society were introduced to examine discussion. The theories of concrete solution of conflict between traditional criminal law and Risikostrafrecht were investigated.<BR>  Lastly, a conclusion was suggested. If actions would be taken carelessly at social demand on involvement of criminal law at existing risks, legal system could be destroyed to jeopardize effectiveness of the law itself: Last step of punishment was confirmed again not to give up even at risk society of modern times. Therefore, the Criminal Law should take actions against risk society not to destroy essence of the principles of the Criminal Law of modern times but to regulate at minimum level. And. social members should make efforts to reinforce norm consciousness and to settle ineffectiveness of the laws that might be produced at risk society. The concept of new legal interest of the Criminal Law at traditional law-governed country, abstract risk criminals, administrative dependency and group responsibility, etc should investigate theories carefully to accept them flexibly and to solve future problems.
      번역하기

        This study examined countermeasures of the Criminal Law in accordance with appearance of "Risikogesellschaft". The social risk that characterizedmodern society had much value after Ulich Beck, German sociologist, suggested concep...

        This study examined countermeasures of the Criminal Law in accordance with appearance of "Risikogesellschaft". The social risk that characterizedmodern society had much value after Ulich Beck, German sociologist, suggested concept of "Risikogesellschaft". These days, the concept of Risikogesellschaft was generally accepted by not only the areas of sociology and philosophy but also the area of criminology. Great risk still existed from objective point of view and unrest was produced every day from subjective point of view: The concept of Risikogesellschaft required changes at roles and functions of the Criminal Law. The terminologies of "risk" and "risk society" were actively said at the social discourse including media so that the Criminal Law discussed countermeasures.<BR>  The discussion was as follows:<BR>  Firstly, the paper examined basic idea of risk-society as well as Risikostrafrecht based on risk-society. Active role change of the Criminal Law at risk-society was required to start discussion as follow:<BR>  Secondly, the paper examined concrete issues of conflict phenomenon between traditional criminal law and so called Risikostrafrecht. The issue could be classified into committing a crime at precedent stage and symbolic legislation to have a problem of Risikostrafrecht.<BR>  Thirdly, alternative proposals to overcome risk society were introduced to examine discussion. The theories of concrete solution of conflict between traditional criminal law and Risikostrafrecht were investigated.<BR>  Lastly, a conclusion was suggested. If actions would be taken carelessly at social demand on involvement of criminal law at existing risks, legal system could be destroyed to jeopardize effectiveness of the law itself: Last step of punishment was confirmed again not to give up even at risk society of modern times. Therefore, the Criminal Law should take actions against risk society not to destroy essence of the principles of the Criminal Law of modern times but to regulate at minimum level. And. social members should make efforts to reinforce norm consciousness and to settle ineffectiveness of the laws that might be produced at risk society. The concept of new legal interest of the Criminal Law at traditional law-governed country, abstract risk criminals, administrative dependency and group responsibility, etc should investigate theories carefully to accept them flexibly and to solve future problems.

      더보기

      목차 (Table of Contents)

      • Ⅰ. 머리말
        Ⅱ. 위험사회와 위험형법
        Ⅲ. 전통적 형법관에 대한 위험형법의 도전
        Ⅳ. 형법적 대응의 방향 모색
        Ⅴ. 결어
        [ABSTRACT]
      • Ⅰ. 머리말
        Ⅱ. 위험사회와 위험형법
        Ⅲ. 전통적 형법관에 대한 위험형법의 도전
        Ⅳ. 형법적 대응의 방향 모색
        Ⅴ. 결어
        [ABSTRACT]
      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

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2022 평가예정 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
      2019-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (계속평가) KCI등재
      2018-12-01 평가 등재후보로 하락 (계속평가) KCI등재후보
      2017-10-24 학회명변경 한글명 : 법학연구소 -> 법학연구원 KCI등재
      2015-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2011-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2009-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
      2008-10-10 학술지명변경 외국어명 : 미등록 -> SungKyunKwan Law Review KCI등재
      2008-05-13 학회명변경 한글명 : 비교법연구소 -> 법학연구소
      영문명 : Institute for Comparative Legal Studies -> The Institute of Legal Studies
      KCI등재
      2006-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      2005-01-01 평가 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2003-07-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 0.64 0.64 0.71
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0.6 0.57 0.849 0.28
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼