검색결과

검색조건
좁혀보기
검색필터
결과 내 재검색

간행물

    분야

      발행연도

      -

        검색결과 2

        1.
        2014.06 KCI 등재 서비스 종료(열람 제한)
        Through the judgement 2013Do13095 Decided March 27, 2014, the supreme court held the act on special cases concerning the punishment of sexual crimes stipulates the enforcement date of the order system of disclosure and notification of personal information. The sexual assault Special Law was provided through Supplementary provision of revision. You have applied the exception of retrospective application for the notification order system and disclosure of personal information instruction In relation to this, children youth protection law, has placed the provisions of the Supplementary Provisions to limit the crime that was committed after the enforcement of the law. In contrast, sexual assault method is not provided any limitation. Was ruling that it is possible to apply retroactively as this reason. Anyone who commits a crime prior to enact sexual assault law in this way, it has given a notice command imposition and disclosure of personal information instruction. we have affirmed the notification request command and disclosure of personal information instruction. The legal character of the system of disclosure and notification of sexual offender`s personal information is not defined precisely yet The guilty part should not destroy. Act on the Protection of Children and Youth Sex in a public notice of the command should be called subjects. Timely and important issues in the first viable target children and youth taking action to avoid sexual offenses should be take precautions. The current system of personal information disclosure, notice the careful analysis of children and youth have a sex offender and implement a plan to expand its type will be needed The current system of personal information disclosure, notice the careful analysis of children and youth have a sex offender and implement a plan to expand its type will be needed.
        2.
        2014.06 KCI 등재 서비스 종료(열람 제한)
        On January in 2013, a district judge made a constitutional suit to the Constitutional Court whether voluntary prostitution is unconstitutional. The key point is that the legal interest of the punishing voluntary prostitution is obscure, to punish it is not accorded with the properness of manner and the minimum of victim, and it is questionable in point of equal protection. The question that voluntary prostitution is unconstitutional is during debate since long time ago. Some says it should not be punished because everybody has a sexual self-determination, others it is crime because it is immoral, and the others it is controlled by the state because it is harmful to the moral people. I make a couple of proposals in the following points. Firstly, because the legal interest of punishing voluntary prostitution is obscure, so that it should not be punished. Secondly, punishing voluntary prostitution is unconstitutional because everybody has a sexual self-determination and buying or selling sexual service is absolutely depending on the individual. Thirdly, punishing voluntary prostitution is out of the principle because it goes against with the ultima ratio rule. Fourthly, punishing all the patterns of voluntary prostitution is not possible and punishing some peculiar types of prostitution does not accord with equal protection. Finally, punishing voluntary prostitution is against the principle of less restrictive alternative because everybody has a right to have a sex without force with another. So punishing voluntary prostitution is unconstitutional. However, if the Constitutional Court proclaims that it is unconstitutional, it would give a shock to the ordinary people because they do not have an open mind with it. So I dare to say that punishing voluntary prostitution is committed to the ‘factual’ decriminalization for a while before punishing adultery is unconstitutional proclaimed by the Constitutional Court.