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

      출처 미소명 재산의 몰수에 관한 연구 - 2024년 유럽연합 지침의 국내법상 시사점- = A Study on the Confiscation of Unexplained Wealth: Implications of the 2024 EU Directive for Korean Law

      한글로보기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

      The European Union recently introduced the ‘Confiscation of unexplained wealth’ through Directive (EU) 2024/1260. This measure allows for the confiscation of assets linked to criminal activities if the owner cannot demonstrate their legitimate origin. While similar provisions for presuming criminal proceeds exist in South Korean law, such as in the Act on the Prevention of Illegal Trafficking in Narcotics, these provisions are rarely utilised. This paper analyses the key aspects of the EU Directive 2024/1260 and examines the reasons for the low practical application of relevant provisions in South Korea. By reviewing legislative examples from countries like Singapore, France and Colombia, it explores potential solutions to overcome the limitations of the current confiscation system.
      In conclusion, to effectively recover the proceeds of organised crime, it is urgent to move beyond the additional character of confiscation. This necessitates the urgent introduction of an independent confiscation procedure that does not require a conviction for a specific criminal act.
      번역하기

      The European Union recently introduced the ‘Confiscation of unexplained wealth’ through Directive (EU) 2024/1260. This measure allows for the confiscation of assets linked to criminal activities if...

      The European Union recently introduced the ‘Confiscation of unexplained wealth’ through Directive (EU) 2024/1260. This measure allows for the confiscation of assets linked to criminal activities if the owner cannot demonstrate their legitimate origin. While similar provisions for presuming criminal proceeds exist in South Korean law, such as in the Act on the Prevention of Illegal Trafficking in Narcotics, these provisions are rarely utilised. This paper analyses the key aspects of the EU Directive 2024/1260 and examines the reasons for the low practical application of relevant provisions in South Korea. By reviewing legislative examples from countries like Singapore, France and Colombia, it explores potential solutions to overcome the limitations of the current confiscation system.
      In conclusion, to effectively recover the proceeds of organised crime, it is urgent to move beyond the additional character of confiscation. This necessitates the urgent introduction of an independent confiscation procedure that does not require a conviction for a specific criminal act.

      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

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼