2011년 형법개정법률안(이하 ‘개정법률안’이라 한다)은 기본권보장에 관한 헌법정신의 구현이라는 개정의 기본방향을 구현하기 위해 상습범과 누범(제35조) 규정을 삭제하기로 하였다. 그러나 이들로부터 사회를 보호할 수 있는 특별한 처분이 필요하므로, 형법총칙에 보안처분을 도입하기로 현재 치료감호법에 의해 시행되고 있는 치료감호처분과 보호관찰처분 이외에 보호수용처분을 새로이 규정하기로 하였다. 개정법률안은 보안처분의 비례성의 원칙을 규정하고, 강도를 제외한 재산범죄를 보호수용 대상범죄에서 제외하고, 보호수용의 집행유예와 보호수용자에 대한 정기적 가출소 심사 등을 규정하였다. 보호수용처분이 구 사회보호법상의 보호감호처분에 비해 인권침해의 가능성이 적은 것은 사실이지만, 그럼에도 불구하고 보호수용처분의 도입은 다음과 같은 문제점이 있다.첫째, 보호감호제도가 폐지된지 10년도 채 지나지 않아 이와 유사한 보호수용처분을 도입하려는 실질적 이유는 최근 발생한 흉악범죄를 계기로 범죄인에 대한 강력한 처벌을 요구하는 여론을 반영하기 위한 것이라고 할 수 있다. 그러나 보호수용처분을 도입해야 할 정도로 이전에 비해 범죄상황이 악회되었다고 결론을 내릴 수 있는 근거가 부족하다. 둘째, 현행형법 제42조는 유기징역의 상한을 30년, 50년으로 이전에 비해 2배 가중하였고, 개정법률안도 이러한 입장을 따르고 있는데 이러한 상황에서 보호수용이라는 자유박탈적 보안처분을 도입해야 할 필요가 있는지 의문이 있다. 셋째, 개정법률안에는 보호수용시설의 인적, 물적 구성, 구조, 교화와 사회복귀를 위한 프로그램 등이 구체적으로 제시되어 있지 않다. 이는 보호수용처분도 과거의 보호감호와 별 다르지 않게 운영될 가능성이 농후하다는 것을 의미한다. 이렇게 되면 이중처벌의 논란 속에 폐지된 보호감호제도가 다시 부활하는 것이나 마찬가지이다. 넷째, 개정법률안은 형벌과 보호수용처분을 동시에 선고할 경우 대체주의를 택하지 않고 병과주의를 택하고 있는데, 이는 이중처벌이라는 비판을 받았던 보호감호제도와 동일한 잘못을 반복하는 것이라고 할 수 있다. 다섯째, 보호수용처분은 재범위험성을 요건으로 한다. 그런데 현재로서는 재범위험성 판단의 기초가 되는 범죄인에 대한 정보를 충분히 확보할 수 있는 방안이 마련되어 있지 않고, 또한 재범위험성을 판단할 수 있는 정확한 기준도 마련되어 있지 않다.

본 연구에서는 현제 농가에서 사용하고 있는 진동흡수장치가 전혀 없는 트레일러(E)와 트레일러의 적재규격에 적합하게 평판스프링과 쇽업쇼바를 동시에 설계 제작한 트레일러(I)를 사용하였다. 트레일러에 360kg의 배를 4층으로 적재한 상태로 아스팔트 도로 위를 2m/s로 정속 주행하면서 발생된 평균 진동 주파수의 크기를 상호 비교하여 개발된 트레일러의 진동흡수 효과를 비교 분석하였다. 개발한 현가장치를 장착한 개량된 트레일러는 60Hz 이하와 80Hz 이하의 주파수에서 기존 트레일러에 비해 진동 가속도의 감소 효과가 매우 크게 나타났다. 기존 트레일러에 비하여 개량된 트레일러에서 평균 진동가속도의 크기는 주파수 영역에 따라서 다르긴 하지만 3분의 1까지 대폭 감소시킬 수 있었다. 후방의 상층에 적재된 농산물일수록 진동가속도의 크기가 높아 부패가 빨리 진행 된다고 보고된 논문과 일치하지 않는 이유는 전 연구자는 적재함의 길이가 14,000mm이었고 본 시험에서 사용한 적재함은 1,820mm로 비교적 짧은 것에서 얻어진 결과로 일정한 경향을 찾기가 어려웠던 것으로 판단된다. 모든 주파수의 영역에서 개량된 트레일러가 기존의 트레일러에 비하여는 진동가속도의 크기가 현저히 낮게 나타났다. 특히 40Hz에서 80Hz까지의 주파수대에서 3분의 1로 진동가속도의 크기를 줄일 수 있어서 농산물의 수송 손실을 대폭 감소시킬 수 있을 것으로 판단된다.

Almost 20 years or more than 10 years have passed, Since Korea has received community service order into the juvenile justice system in 1988 and into the adult justice system in 1995. In this paper, the community service order system and practices during last 20 years are analysed and new directions of community service order in Korea are pursued. Recently Korean ministry of justice have started the missions to expand the scope of community service order and to diversify it. In this paper, the missions of the ministry of justice are also evaluated. With these purpose the contents of this paper is as follows; I. Introduction II. The realities of community service oder in Korea 1. The provisions on community service order in the statutes 2. The practices of community service order 3. evaluation III. The community service order as an alternative to detention at a workhouse 1. The fine system and the detention at a workhouse 2. The realities of the detention at a workhouse and its' problems 3. The plan of the ministry of justice 4. evaluation of the plan IV. The community service order as a independent disposition 1. Suggestions 2. The draft of the revised Juvenile Act 2007 3. evaluation V. Diversifying the community service order as a criminal sanction 1. The possibility of coexistence of probation order and community service order 2. The community service order as a condition of a suspended sentence 3. The community service order as a condition of parole 4. The community service order as a condition of a suspended prosecution VI. Conclusion

Since last year, the protection of crime victims in criminal justice has become hot issues among scholars and practioners in Korea. The Ministry of Justice has made a draft of 'Law on the Protection of Crime Victims' and submitted to National Assembly. The National Assembly is expected to pass the draft in the regular session of 2005. The contents of this study is as follows; I. Introduction II. The Concept of Crime Victims III. The Protection of Crime Victims in Correction of the U.S. A 1. History and Background 2. Reporting of the Treatment of Offenderst to Victims 3. Protection of Victims from Revenge 4. Reporting of the Offenders and their Crimes to Community 5. Parole Board's Hearing on the Crime and their Victms 6. Strengthening of Restitution 7. Victim-offender Dialogue 8. Education of Offenders 9. Implication to Korea IV. Reporting of the Treatment of Offenders to Victims 1. The Present Conditions 2. Comparative Study 3. Implication V. Offender-Victims Dialogue 1. Definition 2. Comparative Study 3. Implication In this study are emphasized that the measures must introduced and developed to protect crime victims from the second or third victims and to prevent future victims of persons or community. For this purpose, 'The Law on the Protection of Crime Victims' must be legislated as soon as possible and many reasonable measures must be studied and introduced which are being enforced in other countries such as U.S.A, Germany, England and Japan.

The purpose of this article is to study the theory and practice of Korean pardon system, to analyse its problems and to suggest some ways of solving or preventing those problems. In this articles, the books, the articles and official statistics on the korean and such european countries as Germany, France, Italy and Greece are studied and compared each other. The contents of this article is as follows. The first chapter is an introduction. The second chapter is about the history of pardon and the korean pardon system. In the third chapter, the practice of general pardon and special pardon from 1948 to present in Korea and its problems studied. The fourth chapter is a comparative study on korean pardon system with some european countries such as Germany, France, Italy and Greece. In the fifth chapter, some ways of controlling and limiting the pardon power of the president are suggested. The sixth chapter is a conclusion.

The effect of β-heat treatment on th microstructure, mechanical properties and texture in the nuclear fuel cladding of Zircaloy-4 tubes was chosen at 1000, 1100 and 1200˚C, and the tubes were heat-treated by a high frequency vacuum induction furnace. Morphology of the second phase particles and α-grain of as-received tubes were markedly changed by heat treatment. The average sizes of second phase particles of as-received and β-heat treated tubes were 0.1μm and 0.076μm, respectively. However, the average sizes of second phase particles were not much changed in the β-heated temperatures. With increasing heat treatment temperatures, the 0.2% yield strength and the hoop strength were decreased because of changes in preferred orientation as will as α-plate width. Heat treated Zircaloy-4 tubes exhibited texture changes but the preferred orientation of grains still remained.

자동차용 캠 샤프트의 표면경화를 위해 TiG 용접공정에 의한 재용융처리가 실시되었다. 재용융처리는 캠축에 평행한 방향으로 행하여졌다. 캠 샤프트 소재의 조직은 편상의 흑연과 퍼얼라이트의 회주철 조직으로 구성되어 있으나 재용융 처리후 미세한 퍼얼라이트 및 세멘타이트와 구상 오스테나이트의 레데브라이트 조직으로 변화하였다. 캠 샤프트 모재의경도는 HRc 25~28에서 재용융 처리후에는 HRg 53~55정도로 증가하였다. 다층 용융 처리시 비드가 겹치는 경계에서 검은띠가 관찰되었는데 이 검은띠는 흑연으로 판명되었다. 이 검은띠는 전층의 레데브라이트 조직이 변태된 것으로 주로 세멘타이트와 기지조직의 경계에서 생성되었다. 고밀도 에너지인 레이저 용융처리시에도 재흑연화 현상은 TIG의 경우처럼 관찰되었다. 재흑연화 현상의 확인을 위해서 Gleeble 1500을 이용하여 1100˚C와 1000˚C에서 0.5, 1, 3, 5 및 10초동안 유지한 모의실험을 하였다. 1000˚C에서 0.5초 유지했을 때도 흑연이 발견된 것으로 보아 재흑연화 현상은 어떠한 재용융 처리 공정을 사용하더라도 피할 수 없는 현상임을 확인할 수 있다.

1.0Cr-1.0Mo-0.25V강 용접부의 크립 파단 시험시 파단 발생 원인에 관한 연구가 시행되었다. 파괴는 Intercritical Heat Affected Zone에서 발생하였으며 파단면에서 구상의조대한 M6C탄화물이 발견되었다. 모재는 molybdenum 주성분의 M2C, vanadium 주성분의 M4C3 및 chromium 주성분의 M23C6와 M7C3 탄화물이 존재하였다. 모의 실험 결과 준안정 상태인 M2C 탄화물은 850˚C, 10oh에서 안정한 M6C탄화물로 변태하였다. M6C 탄화물은 주변의 molybdenum 농도를 떨어뜨려 강도의 저하를 가져오며 크립 기공의 발생 원인을 제공하였다.

In the year of 2017, 110 criminal cases by the Korean Supreme Court(KSC) are registered on the internet homepage of the Court. 5 criminal law cases of which are decided by the Grand Panel. In this paper, above 5 cases and other several cases are reviewed which seem to be comparatively important to the author. All the reviews are constituted as follows: 1. The Fact of the Case, 2. The Summary of Decision and 3. The Note. The contents of this paper is as follows; Ⅰ. Introduction Ⅱ. The Cases of the Grand Panel of the Korean Supreme Court In this chapter, 5 cases of the Grand Panel are reviewed. The subjects of the cases are mainly related with the principle of ‘nulla poena sine lege’. For example, the prohibition of analogical interpretation and the prohibition of wide delegation of the punishment to the lower regulation are commented. Ⅲ. The Cases relating to General Part of Criminal Law In this chapter, 3 cases are reviewed. The subjects of the cases are the temporal effect of the punishment, Verbotsirrtum and the number concerned with the crime of forcible obstruction of business. Ⅳ. The Cases relating to Special Part of Criminal Law 6 Cases are reviewed in this Chapter. The subjects are the calculation of punishment, the concept of injury in sexual violence crimes and etc.

In the year of 2015, 219 criminal cases by the Korean Supreme Court(KSC) are registered on the internet homepage of the Court. 3 criminal law cases of which are decided by the Grand Panel. In this paper, these three cases and several cases are reviewed which seem to be comparatively important. In addition, are reviewed some cases by Korean Constitutional Court which review the constitutionality of some criminal provisions such as violence with weapon or dangerous thing. All the reviews are constituted as follows : 1. The Fact of the Case, 2. The Summary of Decision and 3. The Note. The contents of this paper is as follows; I. Introduction II. The Judgements of the Grand Panel of the Korean Supreme Court In this chapter, 3 cases of the Grand Panel of the KSC are reviewed. III. The Decisions of the Korean Constitutional Court In this chapter, 3 cases on the constitutionality of the criminal provisions are reviewed. The subject of the cases are the violence crime with a weapon or a dangerous thing, sex offender registration and the medicine treatment of sex offenders. IV. Several Judgements of The Korean Supreme Court In this chapter, 3 cases are reviewed. The subjects of the cases are such as the breach of trust, the concept of the drug, the concept of the public service man and etc.

In the year of 2014, 194 criminal cases decided by the Korean Supreme Court(KSC) are registered on the internet homepage of the Court. 2 cases of which are decided by the Grand Panel. In this paper, these two cases and 12 cases are reviewed which, I think, are comparatively imporant. 3 cases are concerning the general provisions of Korean Criminal Law. The other 7 cases are concening the pariticular provisions of Korean Criminal Law. All the reviews are constituted of 1. The Fact of the Case, 2. The Summary of Decision and 3. The Note. The contents of this paper is as follows; I. Introduction II. The Grnad Panel of the KSC’s Judgements In this chapter, 2cases of the Grand Panel in KSC are reviewed. III. The KSC’s Judgements concerning the General Provisions of Criminal Law In this chapter, 3 cases are selected and reviewed. The related subjects of the cases are such as the periodical application scope of the criminal law and the criminal responsibility of the doctors. IV. The KSC’s Judgements concerning the Particular Provisons of Criminal Law In this chapter, 7 cases are selected and reviewed. The related subjects of the cases are such as the crime of comtempt, the subjective element of the theft, the legislative and dogmatic problems of the robbery that results in injury, the problem of the quasi-robbery and etc.

In the year of 2013, 171 criminal cases decided by the Korean Supreme Court(KSC) are registered on the internet homepage of the Court. 3 cases of which are decided by the Grand Panel. In this paper, 13 cases of the 171 cases are reviewed which, I think, are comparatively imporant. 4 cases are concerning the general provisions of Korean Criminal Law. The other 6 cases are concening the pariticular provisions of Korean Criminal Law. All the reviews are constituted of 1. The Fact of the Case, 2. The Summary of Decision and 3. The Note.

In the year of 2012, 259 criminal cases decided by the Korean Supreme Court(KSC) are registered on the internet homepage of the Court. 4 cases of which are decided by the Grand Panel. In this paper, 20 cases of the 259 cases are reviewed which, I think, are comparatively imporant. 7 cases are conceruing the general provisions of Korean Criminal Law. The other 13 cases are concering the pariticular provisions of Korean Cirminal Law. All the reviews are constituted of 1. The Fact of the Case, 2. The Summary of Decision and 3. The Critical Note.

In the year of 2010, 286 criminal cases by the Korean Supreme Court are registered on the homepage of that court. Four cases are decided by the counsel of all judge members, two cases of which were on the crimial procedure and the other two cases were on the criminal law. In this paper are reviewed some cases by the supreme court which seem to have theoretical or practical problems. The contents of this paper is as follows; I. Introduction II. The Cases relating to the General Provisions of Criminal Law In this chapter, following cases are reviewed. The Review is constituted as follows : (1) The fact of case, (2) The main point of case, (3) The note on case. But in many reviews the fact is omitted, because the main point of case concludes the fact of the case. 1. Supreme Court 2011. 4. 14. 2010Do5605 2. Supreme Court 2011. 1. 13. 2010Do9927 3. Supreme Court 2011. 9. 29. 2008Do9109 III. The Cases relating to Individual Provisions of Criminal Law In this chapter, following cases are reviewed. Every review is constituted as follows : (1)The fact of case, (2) The main point of case, (3) The note on case. But in many reviews the fact is omitted, because the main point of case concludes the fact of the case. 1. Supreme Court 2011. 6. 9. 선고 2010Do10677 2. Supreme Court 2011. 4. 14. 2011Do300 3. Supreme Court 2011. 10. 13. 2009Do13751 4. Supreme Court 2011. 7. 14. 2011Do3180 5. Supreme Court 2011. 4. 28. 2010Do15350 6. Supreme Court 2011. 7. 28. 2009Do14928

In the year of 2010, 286 criminal cases by the Korean Supreme Court are registered on the homepage of that court. Four cases are decided by the counsel of all judge members, two cases of which were on the crimial procedure and the other two cases were on the criminal law. In this paper are reviewed some cases by the supreme court which seem to have theoretical or practical problems. The contents of this paper is as follows;Ⅰ. IntroductionⅡ. The Cases relating to General Provisions of Criminal Law In this chapter, following cases are reviewed. The Review is constituted as follows: (1) The fact of case, (2) The main point of case, (3) The comment on the case. But in many reviews the fact is omitted, because the main point of case concludes the fact of the case. 1. Supreme Court 2010. 9. 30. 2008Do4762 2. Supreme Court 2010. 10. 28. 2008Do8606 3. Supreme Court 2010. 12. 23. 2010Do7412 4. Supreme Court 2010. 9. 9. 2010Do6924 5. Supreme Court 2010. 7. 8. 2010Do931 6. Supreme Court 2010. 9. 30. 2010Do6403 Ⅲ. The Cases relating to Individual Provisions of Criminal LawIn this chapter, following cases are reviewed. Every review is constituted as follows: (1) The fact of case, (2) The main point of case, (3) The note on case. But in many reviews the fact is omitted, because the main point of case concludes the fact of the case. 1. Supreme Court 2010. 7. 15. 2010Do1017 2. Supreme Court 2010. 5. 27. 2009Do9008 3. Supreme Court 2010. 4. 29. 2009Do14554 4. Supreme Court 2010. 9. 30. 2010Do7405 5. Supreme Court 2010. 12. 9. 2010Do9630 6. Supreme Court 2010. 8. 19. 2010Do6280 7. Supreme Court 2010. 10. 14. 2010Do387 8. Supreme Court 2010. 5. 13. 2010Do1040 9. Supreme Court 2010. 10. 14. 2010Do8591 10. Supreme Court 2010. 9. 30. 2010Do7525

In the year of 2009, 346 criminal cases by the Korean Supreme Court are registered on the homepage of that court. 6 cases are decided by the counsel of all judge members, 3 cases of which were on the crimial procedure and the other 3 cases were on the criminal law. In this paper are reviewed some cases by the supreme court and 1 case by the constitutional court which seem to have theoretical or practical problems. The contents of this paper is as follows; Ⅰ. Introduction Ⅱ. The Cases relating to General Provisions of Criminal Law In this chapter, following cases are reviewed. Every Review is constituted as follows : (1)The fact of case, (2) The main point of case, (3) The note on case. 1. Supreme Court 2009. 9. 24. 2009도5302 2. Supreme Court 2009. 6. 11. 2008도11784 3. Supreme Court 2009. 6. 25. 2009도3505 4. Constitutional Court 2009. 6. 25. 2007헌바25 Ⅲ. The Cases relating to Individual Provisions of Criminal Law In this chapter, following cases are reviewed. Every review is constituted as follows : (1)The fact of case, (2) The main point of case, (3) The note on case. 1. Supreme Court 2009. 5. 14. 2009도1947, 2009전도5 2. Supreme Court 2009. 3. 26. 2007도3520 3. Supreme Court 2009. 9. 10. 2009도3580 4. Supreme Court 2009. 10. 29. 2009도5704 5. Supreme Court 2009. 8. 20. 2009도3452 6. Supreme Court 2009. 4. 9. 2009도128 7. Supreme Court 2009. 6. 25. 2008도3792 8. Supreme Court 2009. 5. 14. 2007도2168 9. Supreme Court 2009. 10. 15. 2009도7421 10. Supreme Court 2009. 2. 26. 2006도3119 11. Supreme Court 2009. 7. 23. 2009도3924

In the year of 2008, 404 criminal cases by the Korean Supreme Court are registered on the homepage of that court. 4 cases are decided by the counsel of all judge members, one of which was on the criminal procedure and the other 3 were on the criminal law. The cases which are reviewed in this paper is as follows; First, the cases by the counsel of all the judges of the supreme court. Among these are Supreme Court 2008. 6. 19. 2006 Do 4876. Supreme Court 2008. 4. 17. 2004 Do 4899, Supreme Court 2008. 4. 17. 2003 Do 758. Second, the cases relationg to the general principles of criminal law. Among theses are Supreme Court 2008. 3. 27. 2008 Do 89, Supreme Court 2008. 11. 27. 2008 Do 7311, Supreme Court 2008. 10. 23. 2005 Do 10101, Supreme Court 2008. 11. 13. 2008 Do 7143, Supreme Court 2008. 9. 11. 2006 Do 8376, Supreme Court 2008. 3. 27. 2007 Do 7874, Supreme Court 2008. 4. 11. 2007 Do 8373, Third, the cases relating to the individual crime provisions. Among these are Supreme Court 2008. 7. 10. 2008 Do 2422, Supreme Court 2008. 3. 27. 2008 Do 917, Supreme Court 2008. 10. 23. 2008 Do 6080, Supreme Court 2008. 4. 24. 2006 Do 9089, Supreme Court 2008. 12. 24. 2008 Do 9169, Supreme Court 2008. 10. 23. 2008 Do 5200, Supreme Court 2008. 3. 13. 2006 Do 3558.