범죄피해구조금과 손해배상청구권의 관계

Article 21 Paragraph 2 of the Crime Victim Protection Act stipulates that “The State shall vicariously exercise the right to claim compensation for damage which is held by a person who has received the relevant relief fund on account of the criminal injury subject to relief within the scope of the amount of the relief fund paid.” Accordingly, the State pays the criminal injury relief fund to victims and then claims compensation for damages to the perpetrators. However, most of the perpetrators cannot receive appropriate legal assistance, and the State often claims compensation beyond the scope recognized by the substantive law. Therefore, the current practice imposes excessive debt on the perpetrators beyond their responsibility. On the other hand, the State is obstructing the legitimate exercise of the victim’s right by taking over his claims for damages without legal grounds. In this article, after examining in detail the requirements for the State to exercise vicariously the victim's right to claim damages, I point out the problems that arise in practice. According to the interpretation of the Crime Victim Protection Act, claims that the State can exercise vicariously are limited to the loss of future earnings. Nevertheless, the State often exercises claims to the perpetrators for the part beyond the victim's loss of future earnings. This practice should be improved in such a way that the State proves the amount of the victim’s loss of future earnings in litigation. Meanwhile, the State forcibly takes over the remaining claims of victims, just to win the lawsuit. This should be suspended as soon as possible as it interferes with the legitimate exercise of the victim’s right.