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
한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 외법논집 외법논집 제35권 제1호
발행연도
2011.1
수록면
167 - 179 (13page)

이용수

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

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
In case of committing a grave crime related with a huge anti-humanity, investigation authority can publish criminal facts such as name and features of suspect to ordinary people through mass media. The main object of publishing the criminal facts through mass media is to get intelligence from the witness or to get reports from the citizen in order to arrest the suspect earlier as well as to fulfill the right to know. Furthermore, there are objects to protect secondary damage of crime from the suspect. However, investigation authority can be enough ground to violate Criminal Law Act Article 126(the crime of publication of criminal facts) if suspected criminal facts publish through mass media before requesting the trials. The important facts are that the crime of publication of criminal facts almost turn out a dead letter and it is very difficult to find a case to apply the article 126practically. It is true that the crime of publication of criminal facts enacts with the purpose of stopping the destruction of evidence by suspects or any other persons and protecting the investigation right of state. It is also true that the crime of publication of criminal fact enacts with the purpose of protecting the human right of suspects irregardless of whether or not to be innocent or guilty in accordance with the presumption principle. Therefore, it needs to change that the article gets normative power to be in keeping with the purpose of law-making. In order to change like this, I think, the article 126 needs a provision as follows: the crime of publication of criminal facts is not punished if there is only public interest.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (29)

참고문헌 신청

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0