The Supreme Court of Korea has made the conclusions about the punishment of juristic persons based on the Act of natural persons. None of the above rulings, however, provide a concrete ground for this conclusion. It is merely to state that joint penal provisions is the legal basis for reaching this conclusion. In addition, the above rulings do not provide any clue as to what part of the joint penal provisions should be interpreted in order to obtain such conclusions. The purpose of this article is to identify the legal nature of legal provisions and legal requirements for juristic persons punishment. However, there have been no studies on the legal nature of the joint penal provisions in academia or in practice. Thus, this article interpreted the legal nature of the joint penal provisions through further and subtile interpretation, and supplemented what the Supreme Court of Korea did not say.

Ⅰ. 들어가는 말
 Ⅱ. 법인처벌의 근거와 대법원이 ‘말하고 있는 것’
  1. 양벌규정에 대한 대법원의 해석론
   1) 출발점 1: 법인의 범죄능력 부정과 형법총칙규정의 적용배제
   2) 출발점 2: 법인처벌을 위해 자연인과 법인에 대해 요구하는요건
   3) 출발점 3: 단서조항과 법인처벌근거의 체계적 지위
  2. 대법원의 출발점과 대상판결의 결론과의 관계
 Ⅲ. 양벌규정의 법적 성격과 대법원이 ‘말하고 있지 않는’ 것
  1. 법인처벌을 위한 형벌법규의 법적 성격
   1) 귀속규범적 성격
   2) 구성요건 창설규범적 성격
  2. 양벌규정의 법적 성격에 대한 도그마틱적 의의와 대법원의태도
   1) 양벌규정의 법적 성격에 대한 도그마틱적 의의
   2) 양벌규정의 법적 성격에 관한 대법원의 태도
  3. 대상판결에서 대법원이 말하고 있지 않은 것
   1) 대상판결 1의 경우
   2) 대상판결 2의 경우
   3) 대상판결 3의 경우
  4. 소 결
 Ⅳ. 종업원등위반행위유형의 경우 양벌규정의 법적 성격과 대상판결에 대한 재평가
  1. 귀속규범설이냐? 구성요건 창설규범설이냐?
  2. 대상판결에 대한 평가
 Ⅴ. 나오는 말
 [참고문헌]
 [Abstract]

• 김성돈(Professor, School of Law, Sungkyunkwan University, Ph.D In Law.) | Kim, Seong-Don