보안처분의 형벌화 현상에 대한 정당화 논의 ― 대체주의 운영방안을 중심으로 ―

With increasing public concern about violent crimes and the reinforcement of retributive criminal policies, South Korea has introduced new security measures such as electronic monitoring, chemical castration, and public disclosure of offenders’ personal information. However, these measures often lack a clear distinction from punitive sanctions, exhibiting strong punitive characteristics and excessive restrictions on individual freedoms, which has raised concerns about double jeopardy. A balanced criminal justice system must restrict fundamental rights only to the minimum extent necessary to achieve the objectives of punishment. The current trend of raising statutory penalties and extending the scope and duration of security dispositions reveals the limitations of a dual-track system that simultaneously imposes punishment and security measures. Particularly, the imposition of long-term security dispositions following lengthy prison sentences exacerbates the issue of double punishment. This study argues for a paradigm shift from simple extensions of punishment to a “substitutional approach,” whereby security dispositions are used as alternative measures aimed at rehabilitation and prevention. Furthermore, it highlights the need to establish a “Sentence Enforcement Judge” system that enables judicial oversight throughout the enforcement phase. Such a system would allow judges to engage beyond sentencing, ensuring that the intended goals of rehabilitation and social reintegration are effectively realized. By integrating punishment and security measures as complementary tools, the criminal justice system could achieve greater fairness and effectiveness in preventing recidivism.