$\require{mediawiki-texvc}$
  • 검색어에 아래의 연산자를 사용하시면 더 정확한 검색결과를 얻을 수 있습니다.
  • 검색연산자
검색연산자 기능 검색시 예
() 우선순위가 가장 높은 연산자 예1) (나노 (기계 | machine))
공백 두 개의 검색어(식)을 모두 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (나노 기계)
예2) 나노 장영실
| 두 개의 검색어(식) 중 하나 이상 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (줄기세포 | 면역)
예2) 줄기세포 | 장영실
! NOT 이후에 있는 검색어가 포함된 문서는 제외 예1) (황금 !백금)
예2) !image
* 검색어의 *란에 0개 이상의 임의의 문자가 포함된 문서 검색 예) semi*
"" 따옴표 내의 구문과 완전히 일치하는 문서만 검색 예) "Transform and Quantization"
쳇봇 이모티콘
안녕하세요!
ScienceON 챗봇입니다.
궁금한 것은 저에게 물어봐주세요.

논문 상세정보

정치적 특별사면과 사법정의 -특별사면 폐지론을 중심으로

Political Amnesty and its Judicial Justice - Focusing on Special Amnesty Abolitionism -

형사정책 v.29 no.2 , 2017년, pp.93 - 118   http://dx.doi.org/10.36999/kjc.2017.29.2.93
김재윤
초록

In Germany, there was a legal maxim, which says “Law without special amnesty is illegal(Recht ohne Gnade ist Unrecht).” However, now people living in Republic of Korea are not in the era of absolute monarchism, but instead they are living in the era of democracy ruled by constitutionalism. Until now, past Korean presidents constantly have overused special amnesty, which is an ‘aging artifact of absolute monarchism’. There are some cases such as ‘quasi-nationally-unified special amnesty’, which is the case of special amnesty without national consent such as the one toward Chun Doo-hwan, who was president of South Korea from 1980 to 1988 and Roh Tae-woo, who served as president of South Korea from 1988 to 1993, mere destroyer of constitutional order, and ‘self-service special amnesty’, which is politically motivated. Especially, such special amnesties were done even before the ink on the paper, before people’s shock and rage were settled, without asking basic questions such as what type of crime it is, how severe and how long its punishment should be, whether the criminal is regretting the crime and whether there would be a compensation for the damage. These kinds of indiscreet amnesties far from national consent had constantly exerted throughout the history of Korean government. From this, the history of special amnesty in Korea can be called as the history of abuse. Such deep-rooted evil of abuse of special amnesty can’t be resolved by ex post facto control, such as condition control – controlling the subjects of amnesty toward destroyers of constitutional order, procedure control – organizing fair and transparent judging committee for amnesty, exterior control – listening to opinion of judicial branch, and adjudication on a constitutional complaint. Therefore, this article looked through not only just ways to improve such use of special amnesty, but also the overall opinions on abolitionism for special amnesty. In conclusion, related articles of special amnesty done by president, which is a mere ‘aging artifact of absolute monarchism’, should be deleted from the amnesty law and should be abolished. The legal maxim from the above should be changed as “Law without special amnesty is truly legal(Recht ohne Gnade ist echtes Recht)” at least in Korea. However, even when the right of president for special amnesty is abolished through the revision, still special commutation and special reinstatement should be maintained. Through this, it is reasonable to make it properly functioning such as achieving ‘misjudgement correction’ - correcting errors or defects which can appear throughout the overall judging process of court, and ‘self-rectification of constitutionalism’ - relaxing rigidity occurred in the process of realization of constitutionalism.

참고문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문의 참고문헌 없음

이 논문을 인용한 문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문을 인용한 문헌 없음

원문보기

원문 PDF 다운로드

  • KCI :

원문 URL 링크

  • 원문 URL 링크 정보가 존재하지 않습니다.
상세조회 0건 원문조회 0건

DOI 인용 스타일