美國 判例法上 民事金錢罰과 二重處罰禁止의 原則에 관한 硏究

김용재

추천

검색

자료유형: 학술저널

저자정보: 김용재

저널정보: 고려대학교 법학연구원 고려법학 고려법학 제51호

발행연도: 2008.1

수록면: 485 - 523 (39page)

이용수

📌

연구주제

📖

연구배경

🔬

연구방법

🏆

연구결과

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기

Civil money penalties are the harshest civil sanctions that the U.S. federal bank regulators can levy against individuals. Although civil money penalties have been on the books since 1978, the old maximum penalty of $1,000 per day was comparatively modest in size. In the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), in the aftermath of the savings and loan crisis during 1980s, however, the U.S. Congress substantially expanded the grounds for imposing civil money penalties and hiked the maximum penalties to financially ruinous proportions. Traditionally many people doubted the constitutionality of imposing civil money penalties with other kinds of criminal punishment due to the harshness and the double jeopardy concern. On December 10, 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court in Hudson v. United States held that it does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause to criminally prosecute people for violations of banking laws and regulations after imposing civil money penalties on them for the same violations. With this decision, the Court strongly disapproved and overruled the analysis employed in United States v. Halper, a seminal double jeopardy case decided just eight years earlier. The General Counsel to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement announced their public opinions that they now had a green light to seek civil money penalties that were also the subject of criminal investigations or prosecutions. Hudson, like Halper before it, represents a major sea change in double jeopardy law with respect to civil money penalties. To understand which case represents the more faithful approach to double jeopardy precedents, Part Ⅱ examines the purpose of the Double Jeopardy Clause, the interests it protects, and its jurisprudence until 1989. Part Ⅲ and Ⅳ review and analyze the Halper and Hudson cases in detail. In particular, Part Ⅲ criticizes the Halper approach seriously based on precedent case laws (Mendoza-Martinez, Ward). Part Ⅴ addresses a harmonizing approach to the Halper-Hudson cases in order to induce more reasonable solution in this context. In addition, it deals with other constitutional issues regarding the substantive due process and excessive fine clauses. Finally, Part Ⅵ is the conclusionary part of this paper.

Civil money penalties are the harshest civil sanctions that the U.S. federal bank regulators can levy against individuals. Although civil money penalties have been on the books since 1978, the old maximum penalty of $1,000 per day was comparatively modest in size. In the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), in the aftermath of the savings and loan crisis during 1980s, however, the U.S. Congress substantially expanded the grounds for imposing civil money penalties and hiked the maximum penalties to financially ruinous proportions. Traditionally many people doubted the constitutionality of imposing civil money penalties with other kinds of criminal punishment due to the harshness and the double jeopardy concern. On December 10, 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court in Hudson v. United States held that it does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause to criminally prosecute people for violations of banking laws and regulations after imposing civil money penalties on them for the same violations. With this decision, the Court strongly disapproved and overruled the analysis employed in United States v. Halper, a seminal double jeopardy case decided just eight years earlier. The General Counsel to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Director of the SEC's Division of Enforcement announced their public opinions that they now had a green light to seek civil money penalties that were also the subject of criminal investigations or prosecutions. Hudson, like Halper before it, represents a major sea change in double jeopardy law with respect to civil money penalties. To understand which case represents the more faithful approach to double jeopardy precedents, Part Ⅱ examines the purpose of the Double Jeopardy Clause, the interests it protects, and its jurisprudence until 1989. Part Ⅲ and Ⅳ review and analyze the Halper and Hudson cases in detail. In particular, Part Ⅲ criticizes the Halper approach seriously based on precedent case laws (Mendoza-Martinez, Ward). Part Ⅴ addresses a harmonizing approach to the Halper-Hudson cases in order to induce more reasonable solution in this context. In addition, it deals with other constitutional issues regarding the substantive due process and excessive fine clauses. Finally, Part Ⅵ is the conclusionary part of this paper.

#민사금전벌 #금융기관개혁갱생제재법 #이중처벌금지 #Mendoza-Martinez 기준 #Ward 기준 #civil money penalties #FIRREA #double jeopardy #United States v. Halper #Hudson v. United States

참고문헌 (13)

참고문헌 신청

/ 1984 / Federal Response to Criminal Misconduct and Insider Abuse in the Nation's Financial Institutions, H.R. Rep. No. 1137, 98th Cong., 2d Sess

Barry Stuart Zisman / 2004 / Banks and Thrifts: Government Enforcement and Receivership / LexisNexis

Cobb / 1989 / Federal Regulation of Depository Institutions: Enforcement Powers and Procedures / Supp : 4 ~ 25

Elizabeth A. McLaughlin / 1990 / Civil Money Penalties in the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989: An Analysis, 12 Geo. Mason U. L. Rev. 289

John J. Byrne / 1995 / Examining the Increase in Federal Regulatory Requirements and Penalties: Is Banking Facing Another Troubled Decade?, 24 Cap. U.L. Rev. 1

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

김용재

소속기관 고려대학교

주요연구분야 사회과학 > 법학

논문수 3 이용수 109

최근 본 자료

전체보기

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
AI 학습용 데이터	원문	원문 PDF 파일
AI 학습용 데이터	원문 + 메타 (기본/상세)	원문 PDF 파일 및 서지정보 CSV
대량 구매용 데이터	B2B 구독 방식	특정 자료 한정으로 원문 접근 권한 부여
대량 구매용 데이터	URL 전달 방식	바로 PDF 뷰어를 열람할 수 있는 URL 제공

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
AI 학습용 데이터	기본 메타	발행기관명, 간행물명, 권호명, 권(vol), 호(issue), 통권, 발행연도, 발행월, 논문명, 저자명, 시작페이지, 종료페이지, 전체페이지, 상세페이지URL
상세 메타 데이터	발행기관 메타	발행기관 이명, 영문명, 창립연도, 홈페이지URL, 발행기관 소개
	간행물 메타	부제목, 간행물 유형, ISSN, ISBN, 최초발행연도, 폐간연도, 간행빈도, 발행주기, 등재사항, 이용수, 피인용수, 권호수, 논문수, 표지이미지
	논문 메타	작성 언어, 부제목, 대등제목, 목차, 키워드, 초록, 이미지, 참고문헌, 이용수, 피인용수, 논문활용도, DBpia통합주제분류, KDC분류, DDC분류, 한국연구재단분류, UCI, DOI
	저자 메타	소속기관, 소속부서, 직급, 연구분야, 연구키워드, 이용수, 피인용수, 저자 논문활용도

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
※ 결합형/맞춤형 메타 데이터는 신청 내용에 따라 다양하게 제공 가능
이용순위 정보	주제분야별 많이 이용된 논문	“인문학”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	이용기관별 많이 이용된 논문	“중고등학교”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	세부기관별 많이 이용된 논문	“서울대학교”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	키워드별 많이 이용된 논문	“Chat GPT”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
키워드 정보	많이 이용된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 이용된 키워드
	많이 발행된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 발행된 키워드
	많이 검색된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 검색된 키워드
	연구 트렌드 키워드	특정 키워드 연관 연구동향 분석 데이터 키워드

논문 기본 정보

초록· 키워드

AI 요약

연구주제

연구배경

연구방법

연구결과

주요내용

목차

참고문헌 (13)

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

댓글(0)