징벌적 손해배상과 형사법의 정합성

It has been over 10 years since the punitive damages system was introduced into our legal system. Although the conventional pros and cons have largely lost their meaning, the question of whether punitive damages can be compatible with our civil and criminal system due to the nature of being a type of compensation for damages and aimed at punishment and prevention, that is, the issue of consistency with our legal system, is It still remains assignment. Accordingly, this paper examines whether the punitive damages system is compatible with our criminal legal system by dividing it into the possibility of incorporation into the criminal justice system and the possibility of coexistence. First, it was confirmed whether punitive damages were appropriate as a criminal sanction in our criminal justice system. It was confirmed that it is not consistent with punishment or security measures, as the public punishment can be neutralized, that there is no practical benefit in introducing a new property punishment, and that it does not fit with the purpose of security measures, which is to prevent recidivism. Next, the possibility of coexistence with the criminal legal system was confirmed by confirming the possibility of harmonization with responsibility and fines. As long as punitive damages are understood as a special type of civil damages, it will be difficult to discuss harmonization with criminal liability. In particular, whether punitive damages can act as a supplement or reference point in the process of imposing punishment is being discussed in academic and legislative theory, but it has also been confirmed that it has clear limitations in that it may run counter to the purpose of punishment and the civil and criminal structure. Nevertheless, in a reality where punitive damages can be imposed along with fines, it is an undeniable reality that these discussions are seeking a minimum harmony with responsibility.