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
The noticed disposition was originally introduced to guarantee government revenue through prompt and rapid procedure for criminals related to nation's finance like government monoply and tax. Later it became applied to criminals violating the Inmmigration Control law, recently applied to traffic and minor offences thatoften happen and are in low degree of social blame, therefore it has been recognized as an issue of decriminalization.
This may be a system that can accomplish its goals of recovery of right infringment, oppressing recurrence for ones who are in charge of investigation and prosecution, being free from criminal punishment through pompt and easy procesure for offenders.
Despite of the purposes of this system, it has lots of problems. Recently the issue is the problem of redemption against right infringment.
Under the name of decriminalization it is done by the executive not by judicial authorities, which has rather criminal character, and the offenders are enforced to accept the penalty without any objection in order to avoid prosecution. Also the offenders who are disobedient against this penalty are transferred to be in prosecution without filtration, which is giving up decriminalization.
It adds the seriousness because there are few means of redemption and fighting against it, despite it is the punishment usually used by the executive, the direct act causing right infringment, but focused on the simplization of punishment and guaranteeing effectiveness of executive authority, which is different from the original goals of this system.
It was introduced to reduce the excessive works of judicial authorities, to simplify the punish procedure and to achieve the executive goals promptly and easily. It may be effective on some parts of its operation but we overlook the procedure for redemption or the ways for objection against this, and the symplified procedures, which is different from the original goals ofthis system.
There are some problems, whether it is reasonable to transfer this power from the judicial authorities to the executives, shaking the idea of "seperate and balance".
These problems stem from the situation in which we just accepted its skillful parts of punishment but not accepted redemption for infringment or objection procedures when “W arnung mit Bußgeld" in Germany was introduced to our country. Therefore it became powerful means of punishment having semi-judicial effectiveness against offenders and it is done not by judicial authorities but by the executive. There is strong need to study on "Warnung" in Germany, especiallyto accept the system("W arnung ohne Bußgeld") positively.
This may be a system that can accomplish its goals of recovery of right infringment, oppressing recurrence for ones who are in charge of investigation and prosecution, being free from criminal punishment through pompt and easy procesure for offenders.
Despite of the purposes of this system, it has lots of problems. Recently the issue is the problem of redemption against right infringment.
Under the name of decriminalization it is done by the executive not by judicial authorities, which has rather criminal character, and the offenders are enforced to accept the penalty without any objection in order to avoid prosecution. Also the offenders who are disobedient against this penalty are transferred to be in prosecution without filtration, which is giving up decriminalization.
It adds the seriousness because there are few means of redemption and fighting against it, despite it is the punishment usually used by the executive, the direct act causing right infringment, but focused on the simplization of punishment and guaranteeing effectiveness of executive authority, which is different from the original goals of this system.
It was introduced to reduce the excessive works of judicial authorities, to simplify the punish procedure and to achieve the executive goals promptly and easily. It may be effective on some parts of its operation but we overlook the procedure for redemption or the ways for objection against this, and the symplified procedures, which is different from the original goals ofthis system.
There are some problems, whether it is reasonable to transfer this power from the judicial authorities to the executives, shaking the idea of "seperate and balance".
These problems stem from the situation in which we just accepted its skillful parts of punishment but not accepted redemption for infringment or objection procedures when “W arnung mit Bußgeld" in Germany was introduced to our country. Therefore it became powerful means of punishment having semi-judicial effectiveness against offenders and it is done not by judicial authorities but by the executive. There is strong need to study on "Warnung" in Germany, especiallyto accept the system("W arnung ohne Bußgeld") positively.
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가는 말
Ⅱ. 교통범죄의 의의 및 실태
Ⅲ. 교통범죄의 비범죄화
Ⅳ. 통고처분제도
Ⅴ. 독일의 경고제도
Ⅵ. 맺음말
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문과 연관된 판례 (2)
-
대법원 1962. 1. 31. 선고 4294행상40 판결
성질상으로는 행정처분이라 하여도 그것이 전부 행정소송의 대상으로 취소변경을 소구할 수 있는 것은 아니며 형사절차에 관한 행위의 옳고 그른 것은 형사소송법규에 의하여서만 다툴 수 있고 행정소송의 대상이 될 수 없는 것인 바, 조세범처벌절차법에 의한 통고처분은 그 처분을 받은 자가 통고취지를 이행하지 아니한 때에는 세무관서의 선발에 의하여 형
자세히 보기 -
대법원 1995. 6. 29. 선고 95누4674 판결
도로교통법 제118조에서 규정하는 경찰서장의 통고처분은 행정소송의 대상이되는 행정처분이 아니므로 그 처분의 취소를 구하는 소송은 부적법하고, 도로교통법상의 통고처분을 받은 자가 그 처분에 대하여 이의가 있는 경우에는 통고처분에 따른 범칙금의 납부를 이행하지 아니함으로써 경찰서장의 즉결심판청구에 의하여 법원의 심판을 받을 수 있게 될 뿐
자세히 보기
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
교통관련범죄의 비범죄화에 관한 연구
형사정책연구원 연구총서
2000 .12
-
비범죄화의 유형에 관한 연구
저스티스
2010 .06
-
경찰의 통고처분과 교통범칙금에 관한 연구
한국경찰학회보
2011 .01
-
통고처분 : 행정강제로서 통고처분의 문제점을 중심으로
법학연구
2009 .12
-
도시의 지역적 특징과 범죄와의 관계를 통한 범죄예방에 관한 연구
한국경찰연구
2008 .01
-
과잉범죄화의 극복을 위한 비범죄화에 관한 연구 : 다각적인 접근방안의 모색
저스티스
2014 .02
-
중국의 청소년 범죄에 관한 연구
사회이론
2005 .06
-
중소도시의 범죄에 대한 시민의식 조사연구-안동시를 중심으로-
한국공안행정학회보
2003 .01
-
범죄예방정책의 바람직한 추진방향 - 관련 법률 제정과 제도개선을 중심으로 -
경찰학논총
2017 .01
-
묻지마 범죄담론의 사회적 구성과 영향: 묻지마 범죄에 대한 비판적 검토와 대안적 접근
한국경찰연구
2013 .01
-
성별에 따른 범죄에 대한 인식이 범죄 두려움에 미치는 영향 연구
한국경찰연구
2008 .01
-
대전광역시 범죄발생의 특성과 지역공동체내 범죄예방시스템 구축에관한 연구
경찰학논총
2016 .01
-
우리사회의 범죄상황과 범죄대책의 기본방향
형사정책연구
1990 .06
-
한국 노인범죄의 실태에 관한 연구 -형법범계를 중심으로-
한국경찰학회보
2009 .01
-
범죄에 대한 새로운 인식
충북 Issue & Trend
2018 .03
-
경제적 변화와 경찰력 변화가 범죄에 미치는 효과분석- 벡터오차수정모형을 이용하여
한국경찰연구
2017 .01
-
범죄피해율과 공식범죄발생률간의 비교분석 : 2008년도 주요범죄 암수추정
형사정책연구
2010 .09
-
여성범죄의 실태와 효율적 대책에 관한 연구
법학연구
2009 .07
-
무차별 범죄(Random Crime)의 개념과 특징: 불특정인을 대상으로 한 범죄
한국공안행정학회보
2013 .01
-
한국의 범죄동향, 1970-2004 : 공식통계를 중심으로
경찰학논총
2006 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2012-364-003957604