실행착수의 위험성과 불능미수의 위험성

The prevalent parties interpret the article 25-1 as the ground regulation of the obstacle attempt. But the article 25-1 is the set-up regulation of the attempted crime concept as well as the ground regulation of the obstacle attempt. So the judgement order of the impossible attempt can be reformed as follows. First, the concept of a punishable attempt has to be preceded according to article 25 with the start of execution and the result non-occurrence. Second, the voluntary stop attempt and the impossible attempt must be investigated. If the attempt is not included in both attempt, it is decided in the obstacle attempt finally. The starts of executions of all punishable criminal acts including the punishment ground of an attempted crime are the expressions of hostile wills to the law, and so they contain dangerousness to disturb general person's truth within the force of the law. The ‘impression-theory’ can't be the standard of the degree of dangerousness, so we should search for the standard like as ‘impression-theory’. ‘Abstract dangerousness theory’ are the theories which have the standard of the dangerousness against the whole justification. So the degree of the dangerousness of the start of execution must be judged by ‘Abstract dangerousness theory’. The prevalent parties regard the dangerousness as the core point in the analysis of the article 27. But the dangerousness is not the article 27's own factor. The obstacle attempt and the voluntary-stop attempt also have the dangerousness. Therefore the dangerousness of the article 27 means the minimum dangerousness of punishable attempt. Abstract dangerousness is required in all of the attempted crimes, so the dangerousness on article 27 is not an unique factor in the impossible attempt. And the dangerousness of the start of execution falls in with the dangerousness on article 27 perfectly.