대향범의 특성과 공범성립 가능성

In the case of ‘offenses by non-opposite participants’, the same crime is committed by the participants who engage in the offenses, but there are cases where the statutory punishment is differentiated according to the type and degree of participation. On the other hand, in the case of ‘offenses by opposite participants’, the crime and the statutory punishment are different depending on the direction of participation in the offenses. In addition, there are no restrictions on the voluntary establishment of accomplice in the case of ‘offenses by non-opposite participants’ and participation of outsiders in ‘offenses by opposite participants’. However, in the case of ‘participation of insiders in the offenses by opposite participants’, there are special restrictions on the voluntary establishment of complicity. As above, there are differences between ‘offenses by non-opposite participants’ and ‘offenses by opposite participants’ in terms of the establishment and punishment of the crime, and the scope of establishment of an accomplice. The reason is that in ‘offenses by non-opposite participants’, the direction of the intentions of those involved in the crime is the same, with the intention to realize a common result, while in the case of ‘offenses by non-opposite participants’, the direction of intentions of those involved in the crime are opposite. Based on the understanding of the characteristics of these crimes, the following contents are covered. First, I analyzed whether the crime of concealing and escaping a criminal is a ‘offense by opposite participants’ Second, there is a need to apply the legal principles of ‘offense by opposite participants’ to the crimes committed substantially in the shape of ‘offense by opposite participants’, even though they are not classified as such. Third, in cases where the unpunishable opposite participant actively participates in the commission of the punishable opposite participant, it is necessary to admit the constitution of an accomplice.