메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국비교형사법학회 비교형사법연구 비교형사법연구 제13권 제2호
발행연도
2011.1
수록면
337 - 364 (28page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
According to article 314(Interference with Business) of the Korean Criminal Code, a person who interferes with another person's business by circulating false facts or through fraudulent means, or by the threat of force shall be punished. Korean constitutional court ruled that this article is constitutional in the viewpoint of the constitutional principle of clearness in 1998. Recently in 2011, Korean supreme court ruled that illegal labor strike could be interpreted as the threat of force in some specific situations and punished under this article. It is a little change from it's old decision in the sense that illegal labor strike may be punished exceptionally not usually. It is desirable to interpret and apply this article carefully and restrictively with regard to labor strike since labor dispute should be ruled by the principle of labor law not by criminal law. However, there are several flaws in this Korean supreme court's decision. Most of all, labor strike, collective refusal of labor without battery or intimidation should be regarded as a form of omission and the requirements of omission crime should be examined scrupulously. Mens rea, expectability about the serious financial damage, and the correspondence requirement regarding the element of "threat of force" are the essential requirements for the labor strike to be the crime of "interference with business." Modification of this article would be the conclusive answer to avoid excessive punishment with regard to the issue of labor strike and criminal regulation.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (83)

참고문헌 신청

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0