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

      위험방지를 위한 공공장소에서의 영상감시에 대한 법적고찰-독일에서의 논의를 중심으로- = A Legal Study on Public Video Surveillance for Risk Prevention -Focussing on the Discussion in Germany-

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A103127933

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      The new information collecting activities of police spurred by the development of scientific technology are often criticized as propelling surveillance issues in the country and across society. However, citizens, who are the subjects of this surveillance, have so far accepted it easily as a reasonable price for public safety, and the typical example of police information collecting is video surveillance in public places. Video surveillance in public places for preventing risks has contributed largely to the reliability of public influence, on the other hand, it also poses risks in terms of invading the basic human rights of individuals. With this awareness, in Germany, where discussions about this issue have been positive, proponents have concluded that video surveillance does not infringe too far on the respect for basic human rights that is assured under the constitution. The application of the Principle of Definiteness of the Law and the Principle of Proportion, both of which are basic principles of police law for the purpose of making police activities efficient, are considered to be consistent with surveillance. This is the basic perspective promoted by the German court in relation to video surveillance in public places for preventing risks. In conclusion, in the German case, constitutionalism is considered to assure the basic human rights of the people, and Germany is reinforcing constitutional control by implementing detailed legislative rules. This can be taken to suggest a lot of things for our discussion on legislation for video surveillance in the police law system.
      번역하기

      The new information collecting activities of police spurred by the development of scientific technology are often criticized as propelling surveillance issues in the country and across society. However, citizens, who are the subjects of this surveilla...

      The new information collecting activities of police spurred by the development of scientific technology are often criticized as propelling surveillance issues in the country and across society. However, citizens, who are the subjects of this surveillance, have so far accepted it easily as a reasonable price for public safety, and the typical example of police information collecting is video surveillance in public places. Video surveillance in public places for preventing risks has contributed largely to the reliability of public influence, on the other hand, it also poses risks in terms of invading the basic human rights of individuals. With this awareness, in Germany, where discussions about this issue have been positive, proponents have concluded that video surveillance does not infringe too far on the respect for basic human rights that is assured under the constitution. The application of the Principle of Definiteness of the Law and the Principle of Proportion, both of which are basic principles of police law for the purpose of making police activities efficient, are considered to be consistent with surveillance. This is the basic perspective promoted by the German court in relation to video surveillance in public places for preventing risks. In conclusion, in the German case, constitutionalism is considered to assure the basic human rights of the people, and Germany is reinforcing constitutional control by implementing detailed legislative rules. This can be taken to suggest a lot of things for our discussion on legislation for video surveillance in the police law system.

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 권장준, "경찰행정법상 경찰의 정보수집활동과 정보적 자기결정권" 법학연구소 25 (25): 299-323, 2009

      2 김성태, "개인관련정보에 대한 경찰작용: 독일 주경찰법에서의 규율" 1 (1): 96-119, 2003

      3 島田茂, "ドイツ憲法判例と警察法" 54 (54): 55-103, 2013

      4 Gusy, "Polizeirecht-und Ordnungsrecht" Kriminalistik 2009

      5 Kniesel, "Polizeiliche Informationsverarbeitung und Datenschutz im künftigen Polizeirecht" ZRP 2008

      6 Tegtmeyer-Vahle, "Polizeigesetz Nordrhein-Westfalen(PoIG NRW)" ZRP 2004

      7 Knemeyer, "Polizei-und Polizeiliche Informationsverarbeitung" HdbPolR 2014

      8 Friauf, "Polizei-und Ordnungsrecht" Besonderes Verwaltung 2009

      9 Schenke, "Polizei-und Ordnungsrecht" U. Steiner(Hrsg) 2009

      10 Denninger, "Freiheit durch Sicherheit? -Wie viel Schutz der inneren Sicherheit verlangt und verträgt das deutsche Grundgesetz?" KJ Verlagsanstalt 2002

      1 권장준, "경찰행정법상 경찰의 정보수집활동과 정보적 자기결정권" 법학연구소 25 (25): 299-323, 2009

      2 김성태, "개인관련정보에 대한 경찰작용: 독일 주경찰법에서의 규율" 1 (1): 96-119, 2003

      3 島田茂, "ドイツ憲法判例と警察法" 54 (54): 55-103, 2013

      4 Gusy, "Polizeirecht-und Ordnungsrecht" Kriminalistik 2009

      5 Kniesel, "Polizeiliche Informationsverarbeitung und Datenschutz im künftigen Polizeirecht" ZRP 2008

      6 Tegtmeyer-Vahle, "Polizeigesetz Nordrhein-Westfalen(PoIG NRW)" ZRP 2004

      7 Knemeyer, "Polizei-und Polizeiliche Informationsverarbeitung" HdbPolR 2014

      8 Friauf, "Polizei-und Ordnungsrecht" Besonderes Verwaltung 2009

      9 Schenke, "Polizei-und Ordnungsrecht" U. Steiner(Hrsg) 2009

      10 Denninger, "Freiheit durch Sicherheit? -Wie viel Schutz der inneren Sicherheit verlangt und verträgt das deutsche Grundgesetz?" KJ Verlagsanstalt 2002

      11 최민영, "CCTV를 통한 범죄예방의 법치국가적 한계" 법학연구원 (73) : 187-220, 2014

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      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
      2026 평가예정 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
      2020-01-01 평가 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
      2017-01-01 평가 등재학술지 선정 (계속평가) KCI등재
      2015-01-01 평가 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 0 0 0
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0 0 0 0.12
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼