주관적 정당화요소를 결한 경우의 효과에 관한 연구 = A Study on the Effect of the Absence of the Subjective Justification Factor

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

According to the common view, the circumstances precluding wrongfulness reguire both the objective justification factor and the subjective justification factor. I agree with the common view. The mechanism of the circumstances precluding wrongfulness is that the objective justification factor should offset the illegality of result and the subjective justification factor should offset the illegality of act in the common view. It means that the illegality is denied by the offset of the two factors. But the expression of the common view, the offset is not proper. Because, if the theory that all crimes have the illegality of result and the illegality of act observes the case without the absence of the subjective justification factor, there is contradiction which the illegality of result is denied because of the exist of the objective justification factor. So undermine is more accurate than offset. It is proper that the objective justification factor and the subjective justification factor should not zeroise the illegality of result and the illegality of act, but make them near zero. In other side, the superior opinion says that the case without the absence of the subjective justification factor should conclude to the impossible attempt crime. But there are serious errors in the superior opinion. In spite of the realization of the practical result, the superior opinion regard the practical result as the absence of the result. It is not acceptable for the concept of the attempted crime. The view of the superior opinion is not proper in terms of the reason of the criminal law, because the coincidental situation may control the possibility of the sentence. So, I agree with the theory of the consummated crime, not the theory of the impossible crime, in the case without the absence of the subjective justification factor.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 차용석, "형법총론강의Ⅰ" 고시연구사 1988

2 박상기, "형법총론(제9판)" 박영사 2012

3 오영근, "형법총론 제3판" 박영사 2014

4 배종대, "형법총론" 홍문사 2013

5 김성돈, "형법총론" 성균관대학교 출판부 2014

6 김성천, "형법총론" 법문사 2014

7 정성근, "형법총론" 성균관대학교 출판부 2012

8 임웅, "형법총론" 법문사 2014

9 이형국, "형법총론" 법문사 2007

10 이재상, "형법총론" 박영사 2011

11 성낙현, "주관적 정당화요소의 성격과 기능" 한국형사법학회 (14) : 2000

12 이진권, "주관적 정당화요소와 위법성의 본질에 관한 고찰" 한국법학회 (39) : 247-268, 2010

13 양화식, "주관적 정당화요소 소고" 법조협회 39 (39): 1990

14 이용식, "주관적 정당화요소" 고시계사 35 (35): 1991

15 김태명, "정당방위의 요건과 오상방위·우연방위의 효과" 고시계사 53 (53): 2008

16 김재봉, "정당방위와 방위의사의 내용" 한국형사법학회 (9) : 1997

17 이형국, "정당방위에 있어서의 방위의사에 관한 고찰" 연세대학교 법학연구원 9·10 : 2000

18 정용기, "정당방위에 있어서의 방위의사" 한국형사법학회 (11) : 1999

19 정영일, "정당방위에 있어서 방위의사의 의미" 한국형사법학회 (23) : 67-86, 2005

20 이훈동, "정당방위에 있어서 방위의사에 관한 연구" 한국비교형사법학회 (창간) : 1999

21 이인영, "우연방위에 관한 연구" 연세대학교 법학연구원 5 (5): 1998

22 김일수, "새로 쓴 형법총론" 박영사 2008

23 이인영, "主觀的 正當化要素" 법학연구원 12 (12): 19-51, 2002

24 Maurach, "Strafrecht, Allgemeiner Teil" 1992

25 Jescheck, "Strafrecht Allgemeiner Teil" 1996

26 Stratenwerth, "Strafrecht Allgemeiner Teil" 1981

27 Roxin, "Strafrecht Allgemeiner Teil" 1994

28 Tröndle, "StGB(Strafgesetzbuch und Nebengesetze)" 2003

29 Hirsch, "StGB Leipziger Kommentar" 1992

30 Schönke, "StGB Kommentar" 1991

31 Dreher, "StGB" 1988

32 Hirsch, "Die Lehre von den negative Tatbestandsmerkmalen"

33 Welzel, "Das Deutsche Strafrecht"