• Korean Journal of Forensic Psychology
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.171-197
• /
• 2021

The purpose of this study is to examine empirically how the lay people judge self-defense and what factors could affect it. A total of 651 participants aged 20 years and over were asked to answer, attitude toward interpersonal violence, and legal attitude questionnaire, all divided by the type of self-defense. Participants were assigned one of the three types of situations that were claimed to be self-defense, and were given articles and scenarios related to each type of self-defense before making self-defense judgments. In addition, the impact of personal factors on self-defense judgment was analyzed after the legal attitude, and the attitude toward interpersonal violence, which are personal factors, was also measured. The results showed that the rate of recognition of self-defense was the highest in the type of self-defense for oneself, but the rate of denial of self-defense against state agencies was much higher, indicating the opposite. Furthemore, negative articles on self-defense were found to affect the judgment of self-defense. In addition, it was found that the level of the attitude toward interpersonal violence and legal attitude of individual participants could affect the judgment of self-defense. The general public's judgment process and the factors that affect self-defense judgment may be considered to prevent biased judgment in actual jury trials. Finally, influence, and limitations of this study and suggestions of subsequent study were also discussed.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.10 no.7
• /
• pp.107-114
• /
• 2012

Self-defense is defined as 'an act which is performed in order to prevent impending and unjust infringement of one's own or another person's legal interest'(Article 21, the Criminal Act). To establish such a self-defense, it is generally suggested that it requires an intent for defense as subjective element as well as objective precondition of impending and unjust infringement of one's own or another person's legal interest' and considerable reason. Intent for defense which means an awareness for objective circumstance of self-defense is recognized as objective justification element for self-defense. With regard to intent for defense, there are various discussions on not only necessity of such an intent for defense but whether it is necessary for both actor's recognition of circumstance and specific purpose or motive and which should be applied for its punishment in case of lack of the intent for defense: consummated, unconsummated or semi-consummated. However, there is no clear regulations. This article reviews the contents of intent for defense based on opinion that it is necessary for intent for defense and then examines contents on criminal effect in case of lack of intent and intent for defense in case of criminal negligence.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.145
• /
• pp.351-380
• /
• 2018

In every society, citizens must decide how to punish criminals, uphold the virtue of justice, and preserve the security of the community. In doing so, the members of society must ask themselves how they will punish those who carry out the most abhorrent of crimes. Many common responses to such a question is that death is an acceptable punishment for the most severe crimes. But to draw some theoretical distinction between a crime that deserves incarceration and a crime that is so heinous that it deserves capital punishment is subject to three errors. First, what possible line could be drawn? To decide on a particular number of deaths or to employ any standard would be arbitrary. Second, the use of a line would trivialize and undermine the deaths of those whose murderers fell below the standard. Third, any and all executions still are unjust, as the State should not degrade the institution of justice and dehumanize an individual who, although he or she has no respect for other human life, is still a living person. Simply put, all murders are heinous, all are completely unacceptable, and deserve the greatest punishment of the land; however, death as punishment is inappropriate. Also, while this article arrives at the conclusion that the death penalty is an inappropriate form of punishment, I have not offered an acceptable alternative that would appease those who believe capital offenders deserve a punishment that differs in its quality and severity. This is a burden that, admittedly, I am unable to meet. I finally conclude that the death penalty is unjustified retribution. This is the only claim that can effectively shift the intellectual paradigms of the participants in the debate. The continued use of the death penalty in society can only be determined and influenced by the collective conscience of the members of that society. As stated at the outset of this article, it is this essentially moral conflict regarding what is just and degrading that forms the backdrop for the past changes in and the present operation of our system of imposing death as a punishment for crime.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.21-28
• /
• 2019

The emergence of a hyper-connected-super-intelligence society, called the era of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, brought about a new change in the security environment. With ICT (Information Communication Technology) convergence and high-tech technologies introduced across the board, the person-centered driving force that moved the real space is replaced by the code-oriented cyberspace, and its dependency is constantly increasing. Paradoxically, however, these technological changes serve as another security vulnerability that threatens our society, and have brought about the justification for building a cyber defense system while simultaneously facing the opportunities and challenges brought by technology. In this study, the theory of self-defense was put forward on the basis of the theoretical basis for actively responding to the increasingly intelligent and mass-evolving cyberattacks, and firstly, the need to enact a cybersecurity law, secondly, and thirdly, the need to develop a response cooperation system with the U.S. and other cyber powers.

• Defense and Technology
• /
• no.9 s.127
• /
• pp.42-49
• /
• 1989

무엇보다도 모든 서구의 정당, 의회 및 기업의 지도자들은 방산수출면에서 미국이 모든 분야에 대한 절대우위의 시대는 사라졌다는 사실을 인식해야 한다. 이것은 미국의 기업들이 수출액의 많은 부분을 확보.유지할수 없다는 이야기는 아니며, GD, Rockwell, Raytheon, GE 그리고 ELS/TRW와 같은 회사들이 배운 것처럼 훌륭한 동반자 정신을 유지하는 것이 첨단의 위치를 내어주거나 잃어버리는 것이 아님을 깨달아야 할 것이다

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.13
• /
• pp.327-350
• /
• 2007

Art. 2 Abs. 1 GG sch${\ddot{u}}$tzt umfassend die allgemeine Handlungsfreiheit. Daher bed${\ddot{u}}$rfen private Handlungen grunds${\ddot{a}}$tzlich keiner gesetzlichen Erm${\ddot{a}}$chtigungsgrundlage. Dies gilt selbstverst${\ddot{a}}$ndlich auch fur die Unternehmen der Bewachungsbranche. Allerdings ist es bei der Aus${\ddot{u}}$bung der Bewachungsaufgabe typisch, mit Strafe oder zumindest Schadensersatzpflicht sanktionierte Tatbest${\ddot{a}}$nde zum Nachteil Dritter zu verwirklichen. F${\ddot{u}}$r solche F${\ddot{a}}$lle stehen den Bewachungspersonen m${\ddot{o}}$glicherweise Rechtfertigungsgr${\ddot{u}}$nde zur Seite. Dadurch wird ein ansonsten rechtswidriges Handeln rechtm${\ddot{a}}$${\ss}$ig und so wird im Ergebnis eine Strafbarkeit (wie auch eine Schadensersatzpflicht) ausgeschlossen. Dabei wird klargestellt, dass dem Sicherheitsgewerbe au${\ss}$er in den F${\ddot{a}}$llen der gesetzlichen ${\ddot{U}}$bertragung der hoheitlichen Befugnisse nur die vom Auftraggeber vertraglich ${\ddot{u}}$bertragenen privatrechtlichen Befugnisse sowie die Jedermannsrechte zustehen Au${\ss}$erdem soll im Rahmen der Privatisierung der Gefahrenabwehraufgaben auf solche spezialgesetzlichen Regelungen hingewiesen werden, bei denen Bewachungspersonen mit der hoheitlichen Wahrnehmung bestimmter Sicherheitsaufgaben betraut, d.h. dazu befugt sind, Sicherheitsaufgaben in den Handlungsformen des ${\ddot{O}}$ffentlichen Rechts 면켜${\ddot{u}}$ben. In der koeranischen Literatur ist die Handlungsgrundlage des Bewachungspersonals bis jetzt kaum n${\ddot{a}}$her untersucht. Im allgemeinen werden strafrechtliche Rechtferigungsgr${\ddot{u}}$nde, z.B. Notwehr, Notstand und Selbsthilfe, als dabei anwendbare Normen anerkannt. In dieser Arbeit wird festgestellt, dass die privaten Sicherheitsdienstleister in beiden L${\ddot{a}}$ndern durch die Gewerbegenehmigung au${\ss}$er in den F${\ddot{a}}$llen der Beleihung keine hoheitlichen Befugnisse erhalten. Als Handlungsgrundlage kommen nur die allgemeinen Not- und Jedermannsrechte im Rahmen von Straf-Strafprozess- bzw. Zivilrecht in Betracht.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.26-32
• /
• 2014

The increased threat to commercial shipping by Somalia-based pirates has triggered an increased use of PMSC(Private Maritime Security Contractors). The use of PMSC to protect merchant ships against Somali-based piracy threat seems to have been most effective counter-piracy measures. However, there are various legal and practical questions around using PMSC and PCASP(Privately Contracted Armed Security Personnel) on board at sea. This paper aims to study the regulation and its problems of PMSC and PCASP on board to protect merchant ships against Somali-based piracy in the Indian Ocean and Gulf of Aden. In particular, this paper focuses on the legal issues including jurisdictional issues of PCASP on board merchant vessels, use of force by PCASP in self-defense, and authority for using PMSC. Currently, the legal framework relating to use of PMSC and PCASP on board protecting ships from Somali-based piracy is complex, sometimes ambiguous or inconsistent, and currently in a state of flux. Thus, this paper concludes that at this juncture an effort to coordinate this legal framework is necessary, as regards both the interpretation of existing rules related to PCASP on board merchant ships under UNCLOS(United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea) and the creation of new rules. Also, this paper suggested that there is an urgent need to establish the PMSC-specific laws in Korea.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.26
• /
• pp.59-87
• /
• 2011

Security Business Act of Korea is leaning toward the aspect of regulation, while it provides few provisions about vesting the authority, which causes problems such as legal loopholes to be raised in regard to the rules about authorizing the private security personnel to perform security affairs properly and defining the limit of power. So, it should be done to interpret the law in order to draw the legal basis of empowering as well as to set limits of the authority of security main agent, and Article 7, Section 1, of Security Business Act is the very provision that involves the legal basis. In the scope of 'Management Power', the statutory authority in the first clause of Article 7 of Security Business Act, the security personnel can use force for self-defense, defense of others and property, and prevention of crimes. In addition, the powers of interrogation, access control, and eviction notice are involved in its scope. The private security personnel as the occupation assistant can take precautions and if the infringement on the benefit and protection of the law is imminent or done, he or she can use force within the limits of the passive resistance and the means of defiance on the basis of 'Management Power'. The private security personnel, however, can exercise the force only if the necessary conditions of legal defense, emergency evacuation, and legitimate act of criminal law are fulfilled.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Disaster Information Conference
• /
• 2023.11a
• /
• pp.293-294
• /
• 2023

2023년 8월 3일 다중이용시설과 운송시설이 맞닿아 있는 서현역 부근의 다중이 밀집한 장소에서 차량돌진 및 흉기난동의 묻지마 범죄가 발생하였다. 차량을 인도로 몰아 보행자를 들이받은 뒤 백화점 내부로 들어가 흉기를 휘둘러 차량돌진으로 5명, 흉기난동으로 9명의 피해자가 발생하였다(리차드김, 2023). 서현역의 묻지마 범죄 이후, '살인예고 지도' 서비스의 등장하면서 많은 이용객이 상시 붐비는 번화가 및 백화점 등의 다중이용시설을 이용하는 시민들의 불안감이 전국적으로 크게 확산하고 있다(김잔디 & 최윤선, 2023). 급격히 늘어나는 국민의 불안감으로 정부에서는 '묻지마 범죄'를 '이상동기범죄'로 명명하고 근절을 위해, 사실상 테러와 비슷한 수준의 강력한 대책을 추진하고 있다(강은민, 2023). 이상동기범죄에 따른 강력한 대책으로 국무조정실(대테러센터), 경찰청 등 관계부처의 다중이용시설 대한 안전대책들이 강구되어지고 실정에서 「경비업법」에 따라 시설의 위험발생을 방지하는 업무를 담당하고 있는 민간 경비원에게 이용객의 안전을 보호하고 피해를 최소화하기 위한 일선 역할이 중요해졌다. 하지만, 이상동기범죄에 대한 일선의 초동대응이 인력과 장비, 정당방위에 대한 법제도의 뒷받침 미흡 등으로 인해 민간 경비원의 실질적인 대응이 어려운 실정이다. 많은 사람의 왕래가 있는 다중이용시설에서의 민간 경비원 최소 경력배치 기준, 현행범 제압을 위한 무기사용 기준, 이용객 보호를 위한 경비원 위력 사용 기준 등의 제도적으로 마련되어 있지 않아 민간 경비원이 범죄로부터 시설 이용객을 보호하는 것은 쉽지 않은 것이 현실이다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 다중이용시설 묻지마 범죄 등의 위험성과 민간 경비원의 무기사용과 관련한 법제도적 한계점을 고찰하여, 이에 대한 개선방안을 제시하고자 한다.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.21
• /
• pp.177-199
• /
• 2009

In this study, I would try to observe the scopes and related matters of the authority of private security personnel based on the basic discussion about the identity of private security. Everybody knows, the problems of private personnel have been mainly discussed in the relations of the public police. Because the roles of private personnel are similar to the police, and in the perspective of the law, private security are regulated by the police. When we compared with the police, the scopes of authorities of private personnel are considered in several points. First, most private personnel are just only 'citizen', so they can exercise the authority as citizen. It can include self-defense, self-help. flagrante delicto arrest. But when discuss the authority in the scopes of a possessionary right or managemental right, the authority of private personnel can be extended somewhat. Moreover, when private personnel are delegated by the special laws, their authority are extended much more. Finally, when the whole authority are delegated by such as the privatization, private personnel authority can be nearly same to the police. But, it can be considered that the degrees of the delegated authority are flexible. And the exercise of the authority must be performed in the limit that not infringe the individual freedom and rights. It seems to me that the degrees of fairness in use of authorities and it's a permitted limit are set forth a premise not only the legitimate base but also judicial judgement. Therefore, the attitudes of the courts related the exercise of authority are very important. And the growth of private security and the extension of authority followed are inevitably accompany the various problems of responsibility, so it must be considered about that in many perspectives.