기업범죄에 있어 대향적 관여자의 형사책임
= Criminal liability of the person of participation opposite in corporate crime / 홍태석
 
 
제어번호 101954224
저자명 홍태석(Tae Seok Hong)
학술지명 법학연구
권호사항 Vol.61 No.- [2016] 
발행처 한국법학회 
자료유형 학술저널
수록면 167-190(24쪽)
언어 Korean
발행년도 2016년
KDC 360
등재정보 KCI등재
판매처 교보문고

 
초록
A SeWol case occurred in April, 2014. Our country displayed a deep regret to the bereaved with the victim by this case to be invited to when it was so-called ‘man-made disaster’ and displayed deep condolences in a national dimension. It is the ability of the company for crime and a problem of the responsibility to have risen in a topic in the criminal law by the SeWol case once again in an opportunity. It is an establishment range of the complicity so far that it is in an other problem not exaggeration even if what corresponded to the crime ability approval or disapproval of the ability of the company for crime namely the corporation says to corporate crime and the discussion about that main. It is the problem that should be able to admit until I open the authorization range in establishment of the form of the crime that many participated in like a crime of the SeWol namely the complicity. The article of the book approached for the issue of second in the basics in recognition being switched to the direction that affirmed the punishment for the corporation. Japan financed money after collapse of so-called bubble economy illegally from the beginning of the 1990s, and various crimes by the big company manager including the illegal act that surrounded, illegal loan, unjust expenditure, accounting fraud, bankruptcy occurred. The administration which participated in such a case has relations with a criminal act, and prosecution, punished examples are various. Activity of the big company usually receives large number of people concerned, e.g., a stockholder, the pawn of the company and has a lot of influence on an employee, a subcontractor, a retail store, consumers, the financial institution. I cannot possibly say evil by the activity that such a big company was able to take the wrong. Therefore, there should be the sanctions except the penalty in the prevention of the illegal act that surrounded economic activities. However, it is necessary to be careful about the following point in performing investigation of the criminal liability of the partner. In other words, the manager of the company which caused an accident is in a position to carry out duties in enhancement for the company. However, as a partner is not interested party of the company concerned, I seek grounds to inherent economical understanding or profit and act. Even if the person concerned of the business in particular says that there is breach of duty in the management because mutual understanding is opposed, I cannot evaluate it when the action of the business partner is violation promptly. In Japan, there are many punishment rules that there is not a reference for the act of the partner while there is a lot of it when there is a rule to punish the act of the partner in the rule to punish an act of the manager at such a standpoint. In other words, I admitted until analysis of such punishment rule in itself opened the complicity establishment in the criminal law basic rule with lack in a problem in considering for the action of the partner if there was not it and examined a point called the eighth.

 
목차
Ⅰ. 서 론
Ⅱ. 우리의 현상
Ⅲ. 일본의 논의상황
Ⅳ. 결 론

주제어
기업재산  ,기업범죄  ,공범  ,공동정범  ,배임죄  ,일본형법  ,corporation property  ,corporate crime  ,accomplice  ,principal offender  ,breach of trust  ,Japanese criminal law