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.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Entrapment investigation is effective on narcotics crimes and bribery cases. But entrapment investigation may violate the principles of the constitution of USA, Japan and Korea, such as the due process of law principle and the safeguard for human rights principle. Moreover, although the investigative agency owes the duty of crime prevention, it leads a crime. In these respects, investigative agency violates principle of good faith. Such criticism and discussion have been recurred in America. Likewise Japan, Korea has been influenced by USA, on this issue. In Korea, likewise in USA, ‘subjective approach’ and ‘objective approach’ are conflict each other. Despite the opinion that Korea precedents are following the subjectivism is, but Korean precedents still seem to follow the subjectivism. Regardless of the court's stance, entrapment investigation should become illegal : when the person who has been subjected to the entrapment investigation had no criminal predisposition, when the entrapment investigation has sufficient causation that if there were not the entrapment investigation, the criminal defendant could not commit a crime. And when investigative agency uses unfair methods during the entrapment investigation. Furthermore, Korean court should concede the illegality of ‘inducement of criminal intent’, not only in case of the offer is investigative agency but also the offer is related with investigative agency. And relating to the issue, what is the effect of the entrapment investigation according to the criminal procedure law, the scholars of ‘judgement of acquittal theory’ seemed to be confused about the different concepts of ‘judgement of acquittal’ between Korea and USA. The judgement of acquittal theory's scholars criticize that ‘the dismissal of prosecution theory’ is unfavorable for criminal defendants, because according to the theory, the judgement does not have the effect of ‘ne bis in idem’. However, prosecutor can not prosecute again based on the entrapment investigation which had been already decided, unless there was a new entrapment investigation. Therefore, the dismissal of prosecution theory is reasonable to release the defendant swiftly.
목차
등록된 정보가 없습니다.
참고문헌 (37)
참고문헌 신청
Amy Perkins / 1994 / Jacobson v. United States-Entrapment Redefined? / New Eng. L. 28
Anthony M. Dillof / 2004 / Unraveling Unlawful Entrapment / J. Crim. L. & Criminology 94
Brain Thomas Feeney / 1993 / Scruity for the Serpent: The Court Refines Entrapment Law in Jacobson v. United States / Cath. U. L. Rev 42
Ian J. McLoughlin / 1999 / The Meaning of Predisposition in Practice / B. U. L. Rev 79
J. Gregory Deis / 2001 / Economics, Caution, and the Entrapment Defense / U.Ill. L.Rev 2001
Anthony M. Dillof / 2004 / Unraveling Unlawful Entrapment / J. Crim. L. & Criminology 94
Brain Thomas Feeney / 1993 / Scruity for the Serpent: The Court Refines Entrapment Law in Jacobson v. United States / Cath. U. L. Rev 42
Ian J. McLoughlin / 1999 / The Meaning of Predisposition in Practice / B. U. L. Rev 79
J. Gregory Deis / 2001 / Economics, Caution, and the Entrapment Defense / U.Ill. L.Rev 2001
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0