法人處罰論으로서의 組織故意論

In any case, the action of a natural person who is a member of a corporate should be analyzed legally in the sense that it is one of the corporation's activities. The constitutional court says that the corporate’ liability in relation with the meaning of joint penal provisions is not on the premise of its natural person’ crime. Thus the legal character of corporate liability is not a kind of vicarious liability but its own. If so, the theory of enterprise punishment within the framework of traditional theory of criminal law should be shown necessarily in consideration of the corporate’s own character. In the area of environmental administration, it is not a proper way of protecting environment from enterprise activities to place a greater emphasis on punishing natural person than on the corporate itself. A business organization has its own way of thought, and it exists apart from that of a natural person, a member of the corporate. There has been the theory of collective knowledge and the theory of organization model to control business activities by imposing criminal penalty on the corporate itself in United States of America. Besides, there has been the theory of business organization liability in Japan. The above theories say all the same thing that the corporate itself should and could bear the criminal liability. A nature person has little significance in influencing business activities and should be subject to the corporate’s command which is under the sovereignty of Jaebul, the group of enterprises. The focus should be on punishing the corporate itself in the area of environmental administration in which only the corporate itself reveals itself in the sense that its nature person has little significance in business activities. Actually as possible as can be, it is needed to develop the theory actively that the criminal punishment should be imposed on the corporate itself than on the natural person. And the theory should not hurt the principle of self liability in concern with imposing criminal punishment on the corporate itself. Under the establishment of the definition of organization knowledge we could regard it as a subjective illigal factor which should be needed for composing crime in case of a natural person. In conclusion, ‘organization knowledge’ should be composed as a tool of protecting our natural environment efficiently from the corporate’s enterprise activities.