최근 사회적 약자(특히 아동과 여성 등)를 대상으로 한 강력범죄가 심각한 사회적 문제로 발생하고 있어 범죄예방에 대한 공간 환경조성의 중요성이 정책적으로 부각되고 있다. 이에 주거단지 내에 야간 범죄예방을 위한 공간의 환경조성 및 설계에 관심이 점점 높아지고 있다. 취약지역에 여성안심골목길 ‘안심등’은 단순히 어두운 골목길을 밝혀주는 일차적 목적 외에 지역문화의 거리조성으로 도시환경개선에 대한 기대치도 담고 있다. 디자인은 우리 생활에서 많은 부분을 차지하고 있다. 기술·문명의 밀접한 관련에서 정보의 신속하고 정확한 전달 및 제품의 시각적인 면에서도 디자인은 필요하다. 또한 환경디자인은 우리들의 안전한 생활환경을 형성하는 데 직접적인 관계를 가지고 있는 특별한 목적을 가지고 있다. 본 연구는 수원시 팔달구 행국동 주택가 ‘안심등’에 감성 손 글씨를 중심으로 여성안심귀가를 위한 골목길 조성에 관한 국내외 사례를 연구하고 그 중요성과 가치를 파악하고자 한다. 이에, 첫째, 여성안심골목길 조성과 환경설계를 통한 범죄예방디자인(CPTED)의 ‘안심등’에 감성 손 글씨 활용을 제안한다. 둘째, ‘안심등’의 다양한 형태에 각각의 다른 글귀를 담아 지역 특성의 문화와 스토리로 관광자원으로 확대되고, 범죄로 부터 안전하여 사회적 약자(특히 아동과 여성 등)들의 삶이 질적으로 향상 되는 것을 제안하고자 한다. 이에 연구의 결과로 국내외 여성안심골목길 조성사례를 통해 각 지방자치단체들의 침체된 지역상권의 활성화와 원도심 골목길 개선으로 다양한 문화콘텐츠가 개발되기를 제안한다.

The study revolved around the forests of Yangjae Citizen’s Forest, a park where the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) was applied. The survey methods for analysis are as follows. From August to October, a total of eight surveys were conducted and 147 of the 300 samples collected were utilized for analysis. According to the results of the survey, 43.5% of participants were males and 56.5% were females. The highest number of participants visited the forest at midday and aged twenties visited most among all age groups. The participants visited the forest mostly with family and the main purpose of visit was for walking exercise including strolling. In case of criminal experience two sexual harassment (6.0%), and a fraud crime (3.0%) were tallied. Insecurity analysis resulted that “other users’ drinking” and “few Closed-Circuit Televisions (CCTVs)” were found to increase visitor’s insecurity. According to the psychological security analysis, participants reported they felt safer in open space than the enclosed areas. They also responded that dense wooded areas along the trails would increase the level of insecurity, while open space and resting areas were effectively relieve unsafe feelings. CCTVs and lighting fixtures facilities in the study area play an important role to effectively manage the park to prevent crime.

This study reviews the definition of false preparation and alteration in the crime of false preparation or alteration of public electromagnetic records(Article 227-2 of Criminal Act). Article 227-2 of Criminal Act protects the trustworthiness of the general public concerning the authenticity of public electromagnetic records, not the accuracy of information processing with electromagnetic record. Additionally in view of the fact that electromagnetic record crimes(Article 227-2 and Article 232-2 of Criminal Act) was enacted by following the form and contents of document crimes, the stand of Criminal Act which takes formalism(punishment of unauthorized preparation of document) on document crimes in principle, materialism(punishment of preparation of false document) exceptionally should be accomplished. So false preparation means to make an electromagnetic record without authority and alteration means to change the contents of a ready-made electromagnetic record without authority. This interpretation results from the systematic analyses of the penal clauses of crimes concerning documents and electromagnetic records, not from the mechanical identity of document with electromagnetic record. So I don’t agree with this judgement of the Supreme Court(2013do9003). Although we can not deny the necessity and worthiness of punishment of the preparation of false public electromagnetic record, the act of defendant cannot be punished by Article 227-2. In order to punish the preparation of false public electromagnetic records, it’s necessary to legislate a new clause. I think the terms of false preparation and alteration of public electromagnetic records are not appropriate, because these are very unfamiliar and confused with counterfeit or alteration of official document(Article 225 of Criminal Act) and private document(Article 232 of Criminal Act). So I recommend “to make an electromagnetic record without authority and to change the contents of a ready-made electromagnetic record without authority, instead of false preparation(falsification) or alteration of public and private electromagnetic records(Article 227-2 and Article 232-2 of Criminal Act). And as a result it needs to legislate a new clause that punishes the preparation of false public electromagnetic records.

In this thesis, I dealt whether the disposal of the Nominal-Trusted real estate constitutes property crime or not. Property crime such as Embezzlement or Breach of trust should protect the relationship worthy of being protected by Criminal Law. Even though the nominal trust agreement about the real estate is not Kondiktio wegen verwerflichen Empfanges, I think Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s name”(below abbreviated as ‘Actual Name Law’) makes the nominal trust agreement be not worthy of being protected by Criminal Law. So except some cases Actual Name Law allows, the disposal of the Nominal-Trusted real estate does not constitute property crime such as Embezzlement or Breach of trust. *

The goal of this article is to apply the argumentation of so-called duty crime theory that has been discussed in the field of criminal participation, to the field of the identification of perpertrator. In chapter II, the theory of duty crime that has been developed in Germany, has been introduced and the critics against that theory have been also presented. Then, in chapter III, with regard to the identification of perpetrator, big accidents cases in Korea as negligence crime have been analysed and their characteristic features have been adduced. In conclusion (chapter IV) the author has tried to contribute to the advance of the in Korean cases based argumentation by virtue of the application of duty crime theory to the Korean cases as well as the clear identification of perpetrators in such cases.

In the case of illegal drug trafficking, regarding whether to acknowledge the undertaking action of illegal drug trafficking when the person only have received the payment, however, have not yet possessed or obtained the drug, it is not appropriate to acknowledge starting to doing crime. Merely, the person received the payment according to the contract of sale, at least it is possible to acknowledge the undertaking action of drug trafficking crime. In other words, it is problematic that whether this level of action is preparation stage of crime or is relevant to attempting crime. If the person already signed the contract of sale, it can be seen as the direct action of configuration requirement not as the action of preparation stage. Regarding an indecent assault, if someone tried to hug the victim with the intention of harassment within the distance of 1m with the victim, even though there was no physical contact, this has proximity in time/place with actus reus of actual crime. Without the intermediate intervention action, it may be considered as action that is possible to directly fulfill actus reus. According to the crime plan of a person, he/she is about to hug and assault the victim. Action of raising hand to hug the victim is the last stage of actus reus which other intermediate intervention action is not needed. Therefore, attempted indecent assault is considerable.

The relevancy of the seized evidence to the charged crime is a very important issue in that it is connected with the exclusionary rule and there is some risk the evidence could be excluded in trial. Therefore it should be interpreted with sufficient consideration with the various situation in which the investigation is carried, diverse kinds of evidences which are gathered for investigating and prosecuting crime. This relevancy means the evidential value for investigation and prosecution, and the evidential value includes not only the direct but also the indirect and the circumstantial. In this case, it seems that the Supreme Court did not provide sufficient consideration with the various elements of the relevancy, especially the indirect, supplementary, circumstantial value of evidence. Forethemore, it is inappropriate in this case the court of appeal used the issue of relevancy as a tool to restrict the legally obtained evidence relevant to a certain crime from using evidence for other’s crime and the Supreme Court accepted the result. In the future, the discussion which distinguish the issue of relevancy from that of the extent of the utilization of the legally seized evidence should be made actively and lead to the appropriate interpretation.

자연재해는 인간의 생존, 안전, 그리고 재산에 심각한 위험을 유발할 수 있는 중요한 위협 요인임에 틀림없다. 우리나라는 지리적 특성으로 인해 태풍, 호우 등 자연재해발생에 상당히 많은 잠재적 요인을 안고 있으며, 최근 기상이변과 산업화 ·도시화 등에 따른 자연재해의 양상이 점차 다양화, 대형화되고 있다. 최근 10년간 자연재해로 인해 120명의 인명피해와 18조 1,908억 원의 재산피해가 발생하여 최근까지 대략적으로 27조 9,802억 원 가량의 복구비가 투입되고 있다(정우영. 김성준. 최현규. 2009). 중요한 점은 자연 재해는 인명 사상과 재산 손실뿐 아니라 사회 질서와 법적 질서에도 중요한 영향을 미친다는 점이다. 사실 많은 미디어들이 자연적 재해 발생 후 나타나는 사회적 무질서, 공황, 약탈, 그리고 범죄 발생에 대해 가끔 보도하고 있지만(Fischer, 1998), 이러한 부분에 대한 선행 연구는 국내에서 충분히 연구되지 않았다. 특히 선행 연구들은 자연적 재해와 범죄 사이의 관계에 대한 연구는 단일 자연재해에 대한 사례 연구, 작은 표본을 이용한 기술 연구, 그리고 단일 시간에 한 장소에서의 연구들로 국한된다. 따라서 재난과 범죄에 대한 경험적 연관성에 대해서는 논란이 있다. 또한 재난과 범죄에 대한 이론적 고찰이 전혀 이루어지지 않았다. 이론적 고찰은 범죄에 대한 대책에서 중요한 역할을 할 수 있다. 이 연구는 재해가 과연 범죄와 같은 사회 질서 파괴현상에 어떤 영향을 미칠 것인가에 대한 범죄학적 이론을 간단하게 소개하고 이에 따른 정책적 함의에 대해 생각해 보고자 한다.

본 연구는 도시의 범죄취약지역에서 거주자(주민) 만족도에 영향을 미치는 주요 계획요인을 규명하고자 하는 것이 목적이다. 본 연구의 주요 차별성은 서비스디자인방법론과 통계방법론을 혼합한 새로운 방법론적 플랫폼을 통하여 기존 연구들이 가지는 방법론적 한계점을 극복할 수 있다는 점과 이를 통해 시민의식기반의 영향요인을 좀 더 세밀하게 규명할 수 있다는 점이다. 서비스디자인방법론인 이용자여정지도(User Journey Map)와 표적집단면접법(Focus Group Interview)을 통한 목표 계층 거주자의 심층인터뷰 등의 기법과 기존의 전통적 통계방법이 가지는 문제점을 개선한 PLS-회귀분석을 혼합하였으며, 이를 통하여 범죄취약지역에서의 주민들이 원하는 핵심적인 요구사항을 명확하게 도출하고 개선사업을 위한 우선순위를 밝힐 수 있었다. 범죄발생 및 두려움에 대한 취약성 요인은 범죄유형 특성과 인구·사회적 특성, 물리적 환경특성, 심리·행태적 특성 등으로 나누어 고찰하였다. 분석결과, CCTV와 가로등의 사각지대와 막다른 길과 공간, 야간 누군가 튀어나올 것 같은 걱정(두려움), 야간 골목길의 전반적인 어두움, 열악한 보행환경, 산책 및 주민소통 공간의 부족 등이 해당 대상지역의 주민 만족도를 제고시킬 수 있는 핵심 요인으로 도출되었으며, 지역의 인구·사회적 특성요인인 외국인 근로자에 대한 걱정(두려움)요인은 예상과는 달리 거의 영향이 없는 것으로 나타났다. 특히 본 사업대상지역에서의 막다른 길과 공간요인은 CPTED의 디자인기법으로 활용되어온 Cul-de-sac 설계개념과는 다르게 위험한 환경특성 요인으로 인식되었다. 따라서 향후 이에 대한 지역특성을 고려하여 새로운 디자인 기회요소로서의 인식과 세부 계획요인을 발굴할 필요가 있다고 사료된다.

본 연구의 목적은 범죄적으로 취약한 지역을 대상으로 지역주민들이 범죄에 대하여 느끼는 불안(걱정)과 두려움, 공포심에 대한 노출 및 잠재적 고충지점(터치포인트)의 도출과 이를 기반으로 한 퍼소나와 범죄두려움지도를 개발하고, 궁극적으로는 범죄예방을 위한 개선사업에 반영하기 위함이다. 연구의 대상지역은 서울시 금천구 가산동 및 독산동 일대이며, 이 지역은 용도지역 상 주거지역과 준공업지역(소공장 밀집지역)이 혼재되고 외국인 근로자들이 다수 거주하고 있는 특성을 지닌다. 터치포인트와 퍼소나는 기본적으로 모두 대상지역의 이해관계자의견조사와 관찰조사를 기반으로 작성하였다. 범죄두려움지도 역시 이해관계자의견조사와 관찰조사를 통한 범죄취약성 요인을 기반으로 하였지만 지역주민의 의견강도와 직간접적 관련성 등도 세분화하여 반영하였고 대상지역의 물리적 여건 및 현황분석과 경찰청 Hot Spot 등의 자료를 함께 고려하여 범죄두려움지수로 계량화하였다. 그리고 이를 대상지역의 공간(지점 및 가로)에 배분하여 범죄두려움지도를 제작하였다. 본 연구를 통하여 개발한 범죄취약지역 터치포인트와 퍼소나, 범죄두려움지도는 향후 안전도시와 관련된 계획수립과 범죄예방디자인사업 등을 수행 시 매우 유용할 것으로 보이며, 특히 범죄두려움지도는 현재 경찰청 Hot Spot 지도가 가지는 제약과 한계점을 보완할 수 있을 것으로 사료된다.

In relation with ‘affairs’ that become protecting objects of the affairs disturbance crime, there are pro and cons discussions about whether public affairs are included in the affairs in the crime centering on relations with ‘public affairs’ at the resisting arrest crime by chances of the harmonization judge in Supreme Court at 2009, but it is in situation of hardly finding out related discussions on ‘protecting values’ of the affairs actually. So, contrary features of judgment about existence of preventing values on the same affairs in practices become to be contacted frequently from lower and higher courts. Based on such awareness of issues, this study tries to look into attitudes of existing theories and judicial precedents on affairs’ protecting values in the affairs disturbance crime first, and then analyze them. And the study accentuates urgency of standard setting-up on affairs’ protecting values with bases of existing discussions, and investigates relations between public affairs and protecting values in the resisting arrest crime and legal nature of affairs disturbance crime for making a presupposition of discussions. After that, this study will review matters that have not to be corresponded to criminality which is prohibited by laws and objected to criminal penalties as affair requirements of becoming protecting objects from the affairs disturbance crime, have not antisocial nature to the extent of not being accepted at all from social norms, and shall take protecting values by the criminal law in relation with object judgments. Above discussions aim at minimizing illegitimacy that affects influences to judgments by contributing to systematic establishment of jurisprudence on affairs which become protecting values in the affairs disturbance crime.

In the Korean Criminal Act Article 355 ②, it is provided that a person who, administering another’s business, obtains pecuniary advantage or causes a third person to do so from another in violation of ones duty, thereby causing loss to such person, shall be punished by penal servitude for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding fifteen million Won. On the one hand, in Article 357 ①, it is specified that a person who, administering another’s business, receives property or obtains pecuniary advantage from a third person in response to an illegal solicitation concerning his duty, shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding ten million won. Two crimes have one thing in common with reference to principal agent of each crime. But the content and range of “another’s business” in Article 355② is one thing, the “another’s business” in Article 357① is quite another. The reason is as follows. (1) while the former is property crimes, the latter is a kind of bribery crimes, (2) The crime of Article 355 ② is required a particular relevance with the contents among crime constitutions such as the protecting benefit, act, result. Thus, the content and range of “another’s business” in Article 355② must be a business appertaining to the property. But, as regards an interpretation of the “another’s business” in Article 357 ①, there is no necessity for restricting that content to a business appertaining to the property, because it doesn’t exist a particular relevance with the contents among crime constitutions in Article 357 ①.

With the rapid development of communications technologies today, wiretapping equipment has also seen great strides in improvement, making it easier than ever before to wiretap communications or record conversations and thus threatening the secrecy and freedom of communications. Furthermore, the recent domestic and overseas illegal wiretaps have raised the suspicion and fear that ordinary citizens, and not just political and industry figures, may be subject to wiretapping. The secrecy and freedom of communications broaden the privacy of citizens and promote social communication, while the freedom of the press functions as a means of heightening the individuality of autonomous individuals, promoting the formation of public opinion for social unity, and a prerequisite for a democratic order of governance. When the freedom of communications and the freedom of the press, both core values in a democratic society, are in conflict with each other, the question is how to harmonize the two while protecting them both to the maximum possible extent. That is the issue in the judgment which is the subject of this work. In the conflict between the secrecy of communications and the freedom of the press, the majority opinion in the judgment appears to place more weight on the protection of personal communications secrets over the freedom of the press which serves the public’s right to know, even while acknowledging the importance of both values. This position of the Supreme Court differs from its previous judgments on libel, privacy infringement, and announcement of criminal accusations by news reports, in which the Court emphasized the public’s right to know (or the public interest) and recognized the defense of legality for the reports of the news media. However, in the case at issue, the conversation which was disclosed resulted from an illegal wiretap by a state agency, while the news agency who made the disclosure was a third party that did not participate in the illegal wiretap. The content of the disclosed conversation is also factual and pertains to an important public interest in a democratic society, and the parties to the conversation are also public figures. These facts make render questionable the Court’s emphasis on the protection of communications secrets over the public interest, and it is incorrect in concluding that the news reporting was unjustified. In conclusion, the conversation disclosed by the news agency which did not participate in the illegal wiretap pertained to an important public interest, and the defendant cannot be said to have used illegal means to obtain the wiretapped information in his payment of compensation. The report also directly concerned an important public interest, and while the names of the parties were made public in the course of reporting, proportionality in the means of reporting may be recognized in consideration of the importance of the conversation and the public status of the parties to the conversation. Taking further into consideration that the instigator of the illegal wiretap was a state agency, that the defendant did not take an active or leading role in obtaining the wiretapped information, and that the interest from the reporting is superior to the interest from the maintenance of communications secrets when the process of reporting and the purpose and means of the reporting are taken into account as a whole, the reporting is a justified act under Article 20 of the Criminal Act that does not violate social norms.

Criminal procedure holds the discovery of substantive truth as its highest value. However, this fact-finding function cannot be the sole aim of criminal procedure to be attained at all costs. Rather, it is constrained by the principles of due process and a timely trial. Therefore, although the Criminal Code provides for the crime of perjury which deters witnesses from hindering a fair trial with false testimony, the Criminal Procedure Code partially concedes the fact-finding function of criminal procedure by providing for the witness’s right to refuse testimony as a function of due process.This right to refuse testimony is enforced by the obligation to inform the witness on the existence of this right. The question is, if the judge questions a witness in violation of the right to refuse testimony and the obligation to inform, and the witness makes a false statement under oath, can the witness be punished for perjury? This is a question of weighing the values of substantive truth and the principle of due process when they are in contradiction, as due process is the source of the right to refuse testimony and, in certain circumstances, constitutes a limit on the ideal of substantive fact-finding.The decisions in this study take the position that the standard for finding a witness guilty on perjury should be whether there has been an actual hindrance to exercise the right to refuse testimony due to the failure to inform. In this sense, the cases give more weight to the due process considerations of witness examination than previous Korean Supreme Court cases. However, the studied cases are incorrect in limiting the affirmative defense to perjury to those cases where the failure to inform resulted in an actual hindrance to exercise the right. The witness is an individual who bears the obligation to appear at court even though it is not the witness’s own trial, swear a legally binding oath, and testify, all in the interest of substantive fact-finding. The Criminal Procedure Code obligates these witnesses to give testimony, but also gives them the right to refuse testimony where the witness may incriminate himself or herself or close family members. The obligation to inform the witness of this right forms a procedural safeguard to enforce the right. Therefore, the presiding judge’s failure to inform the witness of the existence of the right is a violation of due process and the testimony is given illegally, meaning the witness should not be found guilty of perjury even if the testimony was false.The obligation to inform the witness of the right to refuse testimony exists to guarantee the right to refuse testimony by reminding the witness of the right, thereby giving the witness the ample opportunity to reached an informed decision on whether to stay silent or testify. Therefore, the obligation to inform (Article 160 of the Criminal Procedure Code) guarantees the exercise of this right even when the witness does not know he or she has this right, or is ignorant of how to exercise the right. If the presiding judge violates this regulation and compels the witness to testify without informing the witness that the witness has the right not to testify, such an act on the judge’s part is far more than a minor infraction that has no effect on the legal existence of the crime of perjury. In the cases where the court has failed to inform the holder of the right to refuse testimony, there is no expectation that the witness in question will not commit perjury. It is worth noting that the newly amended Criminal Procedure Code now provides for the exclusion of illegal evidence, and due process is increasingly important at trial as well as during the investigative phase. Therefore, a failure to adhere to laws protecting the witness, especially the failure to inform the witness of a right to refuse testimony should be a full defense to the crime of perjury.

Counts in the prosecution schold be specified by crime time, place and methode. It is required not only for defendants to protect their procedual rights but also for courts to limit the scope of the trials. Illegal drug investigations were not generally supported by the crime victim or witness assistance as most of the drug-related crimes were committed in covert. Therefore, effective institution and support of a public action requires the testing for drug use as an essential element in the nation's battle against drug abuse and drug-related crime. Hair analysis for abused drugs has been recognized as a powerful tool to investigate exposure of subjects to these substances. However, it was difficult to estimate precisely the time of drug administration from the position of drug along the hair shaft. Even if the activity is to happen at some unspecified time, the court’s rejection of the case related to unspecified drug abuse may continue to pose significant problems for the integrity and impartiality of the judicial system, which is making it almost impossible for law enforcement agencies operating to bring about significant reductions in the abuse of illegal drug. Hair analysis results have been admitted as scientific evidence of drug use. The unresolved scientific issues should not obstruct the admissibility of strongly positive test results but also may not be explanatory for the entire case, even though specific questions need to be answered and the laboratory results may give strongly positive.

Counts in the prosecution should be specified by crime time, place and method. It is required not only for defendants to protect their procedural rights but also for courts to limit the scope of the trials. Moreover, count specification is helpful for prosecutors to prove that defendants are guilty. Drug abuse is usually committed secretly at a private place. It has few evidences, in case a suspect denies his/her drug abuse charge. About a decade ago, the Supreme Court of Korea tended to rule that the defendant charged for drug abuse was guilty with only hair analysis that revealed a drug component at the dependant's hair. However the Court has dismissed the drug abuse case that had hair analysis as single evidence since 2000. The Court's 2005Do7465 decision delivered Dec. 9, 2005 confirmed the recent Court's holdings that the drug abuse count based only on hair analysis didn't meet the requirement of count specification. This article reviews most Court's decisions related to count specification, examines hair analysis and focuses on the drug abuse indictment mainly based on hair analysis. I totally agree with the Court's view for following reasons. First, although hair analysis is admissible, it has still limitations as evidence; it doesn't prove when or how the dependant consumed drugs. In addition, it doesn't show the correlation between used drug amount and detected drug amount. Second, when a dependant denies hair analysis, a prosecutor is responsible for showing the custody of chains in the hair analysis. Third, considering the function of the count specification - protecting dependants' procedural rights - the drug abuse count relied only on the hair analysis is deemed not specified.