위대한 사회학자 막 베버에 의하면 이념형이란 어떠한 현상을 이해하는데 도움이 되도록 고안된 것이라고 한다. 이러한 생각을 염두에 두고 나는 범죄원인론에 관하여 공부하면서 이러한 이념형에 가까운 이론을 모색해 보았다. 훌륭한 l이론이란 결국 타당성, 실증가능성, 오류로 부터 자유로울 수 있는 가능성, 예측가능성을 구비하는 것이어야 한다. 이러한 목표를 달성하기 위하여 나는 13가지의 학설을 개관해 보았다. 이제까지 소개된 범죄원인론 중 널리 알려진 학설들을 선정해 보았다. 특히 각 이론 체게에서 핵심내용들을 소개하고자 하였는데 예를 들면 범죄원인, 범인의 특성, 가족관계, 지역사회, 학교, 사회체계, 형사사법체제등에 고나련하여 그 내용을 분석해 보면서 각 이론체게와 다른 이론체계가 특히 비교될 만하면 이를 언급하고 논평하였다. 이 논문에서 소개하고 있는 학설들은 개인의 자유의지로 범죄를 범하는 것이라는 기조를 유지하는 학설들과 개인들이란 내면적으로 결함을 안고 있는 존재이며 생물학적으로나 심리학적으로 보아 불완전한 인간들이라는 고나점을 세우고 있는 학설들로 나누어 볼 수 있고, 또 미시원인을을 주로 강조하는 학설들과 거시원인을 강조하는 학설들로 분류해 볼 수 있다. 미시원인에는 가족, 교우, 이웃, 학교가 드렁 가며 거시원인에는 사회전체를 망라하여 파악한 원인들이며 사회체제, 교육체제, 형사서법체제등이 그 예이다. 우리는 많은 학설을 살펴 보는것 만으로도 범죄란 단순하지 않으며 명백히 그 원인을 설명하기 어려운 복잡한 사회현상이라는 생각을 하게 되며, 결국 유일하게 타당한 범죄이론이란 없으며, 모든 범죄원인론은 나름대로 장단점을 갖고 있고, 모든 이론은 나름대로 범죄의 어느 단면을 잘 설명해 줄 수 있다고 보게 되었다.

When examining existing theories of crime, we are led to an agreement that crime is eventually private as well as public evil. However this conclusion may neglect a possibility that whoever lives his life as a good citizen under the constraint of law in a nation-state may someday find himself to be a criminal. Crime is not just a problem caused by a special kind of man. Even if we can tell criminal activities as delinquent, it is not unreasonable that they are not abnormal. Based on the assumption that a few special persons commit crimes, so far most literatures on crime tend to concentrate on either some properties of criminals or the relation between environmental and human factors. Circumscribed by its narrow presupposition, criminology cannot but provide the crippled power of explanation over the ocean of criminal cases in reality. If we admit crime is a normal phenomenon of everyday social routine, it may be more profitable for the future studies of correction to focus on the question of how to defend our society from criminal delinquencies in practice than to make efforts in making conflictive arguments in theory. Also how to rehabilitate criminal victims who have been excluded from the process of criminal justice should be stressed as a main theme in light of criminal policies. In consideration of these problematics, this study tries to show the future direction of correction policies. Chapter 2 explains the existing theories and groups them into two families according to their analytic dimensions. Classifying the theories of innate or inherent criminality as of 'personal level causes,' I call the theories of socio-environmental factors as of 'social level causes.' In chapter 3, I examine both the existing theories on crime and some problems in the current corrective system with a critical viewpoint. In chapter 4, I want to present a few alternatives for the future direction of correction. These alternatives include the cooperation and coordination between criminal justice agencies, reparation for criminal victims, and the introduction of private jails or penitentiaries. In this article, I argue we should concentrate our attention rather on correcting offenders individually by changing their relations with structural factors than on searching for the more evident causes of crime. In terms of improvement I also propose some measures such as the introduction of governmental indemnification for the whole society as well as individuals directly victimized by crimes and the prisoners' reimbursement system for their own penitentiary costs. We are so deeply accustomed to the rational and mechanical type of assumption that we cannot be readily accept the critical review developed in this study. However we explore the causes of crime to improve our society in practice. If we accept this ultimate purpose of criminological studies, it cannot be denied the importance of practical efforts to enhance the efficiency of corrective policies as well as to realize common good for all the people pertinent to the social phenomena of crime including offenders as the objects of correction, victims, law enforcing agencies and even tax payers who want social security.