형법대전(刑法大典)의 내용상 특징 - 적용범위와 죄형법정주의를 중심으로 -
The Character of ≪Hyeongbeob Daejeon≫'s Contents
허일태(동아대학교)
20권 2호, 91~110쪽
초록
≪Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典≫ enacted 1905 was the first penal code with a few modern system in Korea, even though it accepted provisons of ≪the Ming Code/大明律≫ substantially. ≪Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典≫ did not discard too concrete and detailed provisions as a prescribing way of a crime because this code accepted system and contents of ≪the Ming Code/大明律≫ in many ways. As fixed sentence by each provision permitted few discretion of judge, in a good many of cases it was difficult to rule reasonable sentence related illegality and responsibility of crime. To solve these systematic problems of ≪Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典≫, the Code adopted ≪In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附≫ that enabled to draw an analogy among similar cases. However, permitting interpretation by analogical inference what was called ≪In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附≫ was apprehended that the judge punished arbitrarily, involved unacceptably problem with the principle of criminal responsibility. For these reasons, ≪Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典≫ imposed the following three types of restrictions about permitting ≪In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附≫. First, the crimes to be imposed capital punishment did not permit ≪In-ryul- bi-bu/引律比附≫. Second, it was impossible that for judge absolutely applied ≪In-ryul-bi-bu/ 引律比附≫, judge had to ascertain no accurate provision for the case, ask superior authority the question of whether it's all right to apply a suitable- looking provision, and arrange at superior authority's instruction. Third, judge had to be punished when he or she arbitrarily applied ≪In- ryul-bi-bu/引律比附≫ for the act was the distortion of law. Consequently, we should not condemn the criminal ≪In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附≫ unconditionally from the modern principle of “nulla poena sine lege”. Although the principle of “nulla poena sine lege” is being adhered to a certain degree in terms of Merkmal, a balanced sentencing has not been completely deciding in every case between crime and penalty. We have seen many times that sentencing could be came down by an individual judge's viewpoint.
Abstract
≪Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典≫ enacted 1905 was the first penal code with a few modern system in Korea, even though it accepted provisons of ≪the Ming Code/大明律≫ substantially. ≪Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典≫ did not discard too concrete and detailed provisions as a prescribing way of a crime because this code accepted system and contents of ≪the Ming Code/大明律≫ in many ways. As fixed sentence by each provision permitted few discretion of judge, in a good many of cases it was difficult to rule reasonable sentence related illegality and responsibility of crime. To solve these systematic problems of ≪Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典≫, the Code adopted ≪In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附≫ that enabled to draw an analogy among similar cases. However, permitting interpretation by analogical inference what was called ≪In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附≫ was apprehended that the judge punished arbitrarily, involved unacceptably problem with the principle of criminal responsibility. For these reasons, ≪Hyeongbeob Daejeon/刑法大典≫ imposed the following three types of restrictions about permitting ≪In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附≫. First, the crimes to be imposed capital punishment did not permit ≪In-ryul- bi-bu/引律比附≫. Second, it was impossible that for judge absolutely applied ≪In-ryul-bi-bu/ 引律比附≫, judge had to ascertain no accurate provision for the case, ask superior authority the question of whether it's all right to apply a suitable- looking provision, and arrange at superior authority's instruction. Third, judge had to be punished when he or she arbitrarily applied ≪In- ryul-bi-bu/引律比附≫ for the act was the distortion of law. Consequently, we should not condemn the criminal ≪In-ryul-bi-bu/引律比附≫ unconditionally from the modern principle of “nulla poena sine lege”. Although the principle of “nulla poena sine lege” is being adhered to a certain degree in terms of Merkmal, a balanced sentencing has not been completely deciding in every case between crime and penalty. We have seen many times that sentencing could be came down by an individual judge's viewpoint.
- 발행기관:
- 한국형사법학회
- 분류:
- 법학