해석근거로서의 ‘법질서의 통일성’과 ‘형법의 독자성’

This paper treats which two perspectives, namely unity of legal order and identity of criminal law can be applied as concrete forms of interpretation in criminal law or not. To answer this question, I examined the characteristics of these requests and their roles in the interpretation of criminal law. My opinion is that these requests can be regarded as legal principles, and therefore they can be used as forms of argumentation in the interpretation of criminal law like other methods or arguments of interpretation or other principles. But so far as man regards them as kinds of principles, there is a limit in applying them. The very limit is that legal principles must be used only subsidiarily in the interpretation of criminal law(so-called 'subsidiarity of principle-application'). In other words, this means that legal principles can be applied to interpret the concepts or words of criminal law just in case the relatively concrete arguments or forms of interpretation can not be used. The same applies to the other principles.