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 제30호
발행연도
2008.1
수록면
451 - 469 (19page)

이용수

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

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The Supreme Court completion at the time about the crimes threaten to change the existing precedent. Our criminal law, which punishes foreign laws and regulations differently, if left incomplete. Therefore nothing should be interpreted differently, it has overwhelming support and interpreted differently. This is a baseless claim that the Supreme Court follows. First, Our criminal law Article 286 of the criminal threatened to punish the incomplete and that the crime must be interpreted as Crime infringement is not necessary. Because, you should be objective and the country's criminal law norms ever person's subjective psychological state of the crime so I have not finished or completed is not right. I think however, the decision is the wrong interpretation of the systematic understanding of the criminal law. Criminal law is threatening crime in the case of minor crimes, usually a different kind of crime. However, if the crime is independent of the person's psychological state of subjective judgement, the judge through a primary prevention in order to judge objectively. Next, the person has completed a criminal case, the reality is that fear felt otherwise punished as a crime Unfinished "in du bio pro reo" the principle of combining. Minor crimes, it is crime risk understand is not necessarily right. Hegel said, "rational and realistic it is worthy of rational reality." Moreover, on the basis of objective facts and subjective norms do that, I want to emphasize. Second, the risk of criminal threatening and criminal penalties, it is understood that can be objectively. The current regulations to expand the range of punishment do you think would be the wrong decision. Already through systematic interpretation of the objective to qualify if you feel the horror of the crime is established to discuss the threats. In the case of violation of domicile, and a number of different views of the body in a residential part of others to acknowledge the completion of crime into only one, expand the range of punishment, as if the decision to expand the scope of the punishment. Criminal law is stricter than any norms. Because the charge could be fatal punishment. And when legislators think the unknown "legislators is a wise people." Therefore, the principle of a reasonable interpretation. The current attitude of the law and interpreted differently for a reason that should be necessary.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (20)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

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

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0