지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
I try in the article to justify day fines system and aggravation system of repeated offence on the basis of moral urge theory of punishment. I presuppose that the both systems accord with moral intuition in general. Nevertheless, some scholars have strongly opposed to their introduction and/or maintenance for the reason that they infringe the doctrine of responsibility. On the other part, scholars who support them have elaborated harmony between those systems and the doctrine, whereas others give up or try to modify the traditional doctrine. However, their efforts seem to cause another problems especially in relation to punishment justification theory implied in their theories.
Moral urge theory of punishment claims that punishment can be best justified when it is understood as moral urge. According to the theory, punishment as moral urge conveys the message to the wrongdoer that his act was wrong, and urges him/her to consider its wrongness seriously, hoping that he/she will repent morally. The article shows how the moral urge theory can justify day fines system and aggravation system of repeated offence. It also modify the contents of the traditional doctrine of responsibility, but without losing the merits of the doctrine unlike other modifying theories.
Moral urge theory of punishment claims that punishment can be best justified when it is understood as moral urge. According to the theory, punishment as moral urge conveys the message to the wrongdoer that his act was wrong, and urges him/her to consider its wrongness seriously, hoping that he/she will repent morally. The article shows how the moral urge theory can justify day fines system and aggravation system of repeated offence. It also modify the contents of the traditional doctrine of responsibility, but without losing the merits of the doctrine unlike other modifying theories.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 일수벌금제 및 누범가중제에서의 책임주의와 형벌이념
Ⅲ. 일수벌금제 및 누범가중제의 정당화로서의 도덕촉구론
Ⅳ. 맺음말
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (2)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문과 연관된 판례 (1)
-
헌법재판소 1995. 2. 23. 선고 93헌바43 전원재판부〔각하〕
1. 법률의 위헌여부에 대한 재판(裁判)의 전제(前提)라함은 첫째, 구체적인 사건이 위헌제청신청 당시 법원에 현재 계속(係屬)중이어야 하고, 둘째, 위헌여부가 문제되는 법률
자세히 보기
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-360-000490357