미국 조직범죄법(RICO)에 대한 개관|RISS 상세보기

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

has been expanded well beyond traditional organized crime to reach investigations involving violent crime, public corruption, complex fraud, and cyber crime, among other areas. Recently RICO used to combat non-traditional organized crime. First, 18 U.S.C. §1962(a) prohibits that investment of proceeds of pattern of racketeering activity, or collection of an unlawful debt in an enterprise affecting interstate commerce. 18 U.S.C. §1962(b) prohibits acquiring or maintaining an interest in an enterprise affecting interstate commerce, through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of an unlawful debt. 18 U.S.C. §1962(b) prohibit conducting the affairs of an enterprise affecting interstate commerce through a pattern of racketeering activity or collection of an unlawful debt. 18 U.S.C. §1962(d) prohibits conspiring to commit a violation of any of the three substantive RICO offenses. In terms of definitions and elements for racketeering activity, enterprise can be legitimate entity, such as corporation, union, police department, law firm, governmental agency, and illegitimate association-in-facts, such as street gang, mafia, robbery crew. Enterprise must be engaged in, or its activities affect, interstate or foreign commerce, only a de minimus effect is required. Racketeering Activity must be a state or federal crime enumerated in the RICO statute and must show pattern of racketeering activity. Racketeering Act must be a state or federal crime enumerated in the RICO statute, and the government must prove 214 法學論叢第22 輯第1 號 all elements of racketeering Act by the proof of beyond reasonable doubt. Pattern of racketeering activity requires at least two racketeering acts within a period of 10 years. With respect to continuity, the government must show that the acts amount to continuing racketeering activity, or constitute the threat of ongoing racketeering activity. Predicate acts extending over a few weeks or months and threatening no future criminal conduct do not satisfy this requirement. The continuity means that RICO cases are geared toward longterm criminal conduct, not just sporadic or isolated criminal events. Relatedness is contrary to purpose of RICO, which was geared to combat diversified activities of organized crime. So, racketeering acts need not be similar to one another. To prove relatedness, acts have the same or similar purposes, results, participants, victims, or methods of commission or otherwise interrelated and not isolated events and are otherwise related to the affairs of the enterprise. In sum, racketeering activities involve two acts, relatedness, and continuity. Charging RICO conspiracy is joinder though substantive RICO may facilitate, co-conspirator statements admissibility, only proof of agreement that a coconspirator would commit acts. It is not necessary to allege or prove for RICO conspiracy charge that defendant agreed to personally commit two racketeering acts. It is sufficient to allege and prove that he agreed to further an endeavor which if completed would satisfy all elements of substantive RICO charge and agreed that at least one member would commit at least two acts in furtherance of the enterprise’s affairs as straightforward as with a legal entity. The RICO imposes not only criminal penalties for violation of its provisions, but also civil remedies with allowing treble damages. RICO can be construed broadly, so it will allow alleging civil RICO claims in a wide range of commercial fraud actions. This RICO is a development and extension of criminal law and civil law in the subject of corruption and white collar crime, as well as fraud. Thus, studying and researching the characters of RICO will be able to come up with additional curatives to our legal area.

번역하기

국문 초록 (Abstract)

미국 조직범죄법(Racketeering Influenced and Corruption Organization Act: R ICO (18 U.S.C.))은 과거에는 마피아와 같은 조직범죄를 소탕하고자 입법되었으 나, 현재는 화이트칼라범죄와 같은 복잡한 금융사기 문제, 뇌물수수 등의 공무원 들의 부패문제, 사이버범죄 등의 위법행위들을 광범위하게 규제하고 있다. 이는 법적인 실체 여부를 떠나 실질적인 기능을 토대로 단체성을 인정하여 위법행위를 행한 자들에 대하여 두 개 이상의 라케티어링 행위를 단체가 행한 것으로 볼 수 있는 경우에 그 단체를 바탕으로 개별 피의자들에게 형사처벌과 민사처벌이 가능 한 규정이다. 현대의 범죄들은 증거 입증이 어렵고, 은폐되어 있는 복잡한 사실관 계로 인하여 강력한 처벌을 하기가 어려운 경우가 많은데, 이러한 범죄행위에 대 하여, 그 단체의 실체와 개인들의 행위의 계속성, 관련성을 입증함으로써 이들을 형사 처벌할 수 있다는 장점이 있다. 또한 민사적 구제책으로써 불법행위자의 라 케티어링 행위로 인하여 직접적인 손해를 입은 자는 이에 대하여 3배 손해배상을 받을 수 있도록 함으로써 피해자들에게 소송을 독려하고, 일반적인 손해배상에 비하여 피해자들에게 보다 만족적, 현실적인 구제방안이 되도록 하고 있다

번역하기

미국 조직범죄법(Racketeering Influenced and Corruption Organization Act: R ICO (18 U.S.C.))은 과거에는 마피아와 같은 조직범죄를 소탕하고자 입법되었으 나, 현재는 화이트칼라범죄와 같은 복잡한 금융사...

목차 (Table of Contents)

Ⅰ. 서 론
Ⅱ. RICO법의 구성요건
Ⅲ. RICO법의 효과
Ⅳ. 민사적 구제
Ⅴ. 결 론

Ⅰ. 서 론
Ⅱ. RICO법의 구성요건
Ⅲ. RICO법의 효과
Ⅳ. 민사적 구제
Ⅴ. 결 론

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 Gregory M. Wasson, "Under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), American Jurisprudence Proof of Facts 3d Vol.10" 2014

2 Judith A. Morse, "Treble Damages Under RICO" 61 : 1986

3 Julian Simcock, "Recalibrating After Kiobel: Evaluating the Utility of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) in Litigating International Corporate Abuse" 15 : 2012

4 G. Robert Blakey, "Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO): Basic Concepts-Criminal and Civil Remedies" 53 : 1980

5 Tschupp, "Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations" 37 : 2000

6 Richard L. Bourgeois, Jr, "Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations" 37 : 2000

7 Terrance G. Reed, "RICO Forfeitures, Forfeitable Interest, and Procesural Due Profess" 62 : 1983

8 Eric Lloyd, "Making Civil Rico Suave: Act to Ensure Consistent Judicial Interpretations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act" 2007

9 Lucas D. Martin, "Extortion, Blackmail, and Threats" 31A : 2015

10 Edward D. Cavanagh, "Detrebling Antitrust Damages: An Idea Whose Time Has Come?" 61 : 1987