• 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.

• Korean Journal of Culture and Social Issue
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.329-347
• /
• 2012

Criminal media such as dramas and movies are growing in popularity. However, the effects of criminal media as well as its psychological mechanism are not clearly examined. Based on social learning theory (Bandura, 1978), past studies showed that arrest and punishment to the criminal in media have a suppressing effect. The present research examined the ironic possibility that media coverage of punishment could increase the audience's criminal intention and proposed the mediating role of counterfactual thinking in the effect. We hypothesized that when punishment was depicted as accidental rather than unavoidable in media coverage, perceived high mutability and counterfactuals focusing on the accidental factors could clarify the ways to commit the crime without being caught and subsequently increase future criminal intention. In this study, 95 college students read a story of plagiarizing either no, accidental, or inevitable punishment, and later asked to report their intention to plagiarize. An ANCOVA with participants' own history of plagiarism as a covariate found that the intention of plagiarism in future was significantly different. The results showed that the intention of plagiarism in the accidental punishment condition was higher than that in the inevitable punishment condition. Further, the intention of plagiarism in the accidental punishment condition was the same level with non-punishment condition. The findings suggest that whether criminals are caught or not is not enough to reduce criminal intentions of audience, but how criminals are caught matters.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.12 no.7
• /
• pp.156-168
• /
• 2012

As the increase of violent crimes such as robbery, murder, and rape has become a social problem, the government is considering institutionalizing the identification of criminals to prevent crime and to guarantee people's right to know. Such an atmosphere led to the approval of the revision of 'Special Law On the Punishment of Specific violent Crimes' in the National Assembly in April 2010. The revision allows the revelation of the profiles of crime suspects including the pictures of their faces at the investigation stage. However, whether the revision had been effective in preventing crime has not been demonstrated empirically. Moreover, identity revelation is a grave intrusion into privacy and an abuse of human rights such as personal rights and the right to a fair trial, since personal information of criminal suspects would be released to the media prior to the court's final judgements. Also it violates the principle of presumption of innocence, the principles of due process, the principle of double jeopardy, the principle of prohibition against excessive, the principles of clarity, and the principle of liability.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.26 no.11
• /
• pp.227-232
• /
• 2021

The 「Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Crimes of Domestic Violence」 still has various problems in the legal system and enforcement process. Contrary to the original intention of the legislation, it is operated very passively in terms of state intervention and punishment of domestic violence actors in actual operation. Even if it is treated as a home protection case, if you look at the details of the protection disposition, there is a problem that the decision on the protection disposition is biased towards a specific type of protection disposition. In order to improve this, the need for cooperation and active intervention between state agencies is required. In addition, it is necessary to establish a legal basis for a request for personal protection by recognizing the status of a victim who reported domestic violence as a crime reporter. In addition, in order to secure the effectiveness of the protective disposition, it is necessary to strengthen sanctions for non-compliance or violations of the protective disposition.

• Journal of the Korean Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• /
• v.34 no.4
• /
• pp.222-228
• /
• 2023

There are two categories of online crimes related to children and adolescents: those committed by adolescents and those committed against children and adolescents. While recent trends in criminal law show consensus on strengthening punishment in cases of crimes against children and adolescents, there are mixed stances in cases of juvenile delinquency. One perspective emphasizes strict punishment, whereas the other emphasizes dispositions aligned with human rights. While various forms of online crime share the commonality in that the main part of the criminal act occurs online, they can be categorized into three types: those seeking financial gain, those driven by sexual motives, and those engaged in bullying. Among these, crimes driven by sexual motives are the most serious. Second-hand trading fraud and conditional (sexual) meeting fraud fall under the category of seeking financial gain and occur frequently. Crimes driven by sexual motives include obscenity via telecommunication, filming with discrete cameras, child and adolescent sexual exploitation material, fake video distribution, and blackmail/coercion using intimate images/videos ("sextortion"). These crimes lead to various legal issues such as whether to view vulgar acronyms or body cams that teenagers frequently use as simple subcultures or crimes, what criteria should be applied to judge whether a recorded material induces sexual desire or shame, and at what stage sexual grooming becomes punishable. For example, sniping posts, KakaoTalk prisons, and chat room explosions are tricky issues, as they may or may not be punished depending on the case. Particular caution should be exercised against the indiscriminate application of a strict punishment-oriented approach to the juvenile justice system, which is being discussed in relation to online sexual offenses. In the punishment case of online crime, juvenile offenders with a high potential for future improvement and reform must be treated with special consideration.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.19 no.7
• /
• pp.151-159
• /
• 2014

Sometimes, the misjudgement of imperfect human can not be avoided because capital punishment is decided by a judicial officer, human. Dreiinstanzen system has been adopted to prevent misjudgement. However the possibility of misjudgement can not be entirely excluded in the judgement by a judicial officer as the judgement of a lower court and a higher tribunal depends on the specific criminal cases. And in case of capital punishment executed by misjudgement, it leads to a cruelty result which has not ways to recover the damage. There is an opinion that dangerousness of misjudgement is lacking in persuasiveness because of insufficient demonstration for the abolition of capital punishment. However, also, there is an opinion that the abolition of capital punishment in case of misjudgement is persuasive with reality. In this case, even if other punishments are discussed separately, once capital punishment is executed, it can be irrevocable unjustice because a nation itself commits a crime. According to this, I would like to find out causes of misjudgement in the criminal justice system through the cases of advanced countries, such as United states, Japan, which are rich in studies and case analysis related to misjudgement, and introduce their efforts to prevent misjudgement in this paper.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.22 no.3
• /
• pp.41-55
• /
• 2022

As the importance of technology protection is emphasized day by day, various protection measures are being carried out to protect technology. But attempts to leak technology are continuing. As an alternative to this, stronger punishment is socially required for technology leakage crimes. In response to these social demands, the standard for punishment has been steadily raised. Legislative bills containing additional reinforcement are still pending in the National Assembly. However, in order to substantially enhance the deterrence against crime, it is not enough to strengthen the punishment standards. The effect can only be fully exercised when the certainty of punishment increases. Therefore, this paper focused on seeking ways to increase the certainty of punishment under the current system rather than the reinforcement of the punishment itself. The purpose of this study was to derive the reason why the innocence rate in technology leakage criminal cases is higher than that of general criminal cases by analyzing cases and causes of innocent cases in technology leakage criminal cases. Based on this, I discussed improvement considerations to reduce unfair acquittal cases.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.149-179
• /
• 2010

In November 2007, the Korean Constiutional Court held that a joint penal provision in which the individual employer is punished when his or her employee is determined to have committed a crime was unconstitutional, because the joint penal provision had no contents for the culpability of an individual employer and thus violated the constitutionally protected principle of culpability. After the Korean Constitutional Court's judgment, since December 2008 the Ministry of Justice began to change the old joint penal provision into the new revised joint penal provision. On January 2010, the old joint penal provisions of 110 laws were revised. The new revised joint penal provision adds only an additional sentence: "If a juristic person, an entity or an individual perform due care and supervision over its employee for the prevention of such a crime, it will be exempted from the punishment". But an presumption of negligence clause that is added in the new revised joint penal provision is still vacuum in concerned with supervision responsibility. Probably the new form of penal provision, that is understood to be a kind of the presumption of negligence, could let the burden of proof be changed from the public prosecutor to the accused, in other words employer-side. Especially, when joint penal provision is applied to hospital as administrative punishment, according to the hospital is a (juridical) foundation or not, the application of the joint penal provision is different and unfaithful. In my opinion, therefore, a corporation liability could be considered according to various liability of employee's business and the crime its employee committed because of an organizational failure of the corporation.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.22 no.9
• /
• pp.712-726
• /
• 2022

The purpose of this study is to find out what discourse the newspaper's articles produce and distribute about 'drug addiction' and to reveal the topography and meaning of the discourse. Data were collected by searching 'drug' 'drug addiction' as keywords for news articles in four daily newspapers in Korea. As a result of analyzing using Norman Fairclough's critical discourse analysis, first, the 'crime-punishment' discourse was dominant in textual analysis. Drug addiction is a social evil and a serious crime such as sex crimes, child crimes, and violence, so it should be strictly punished. Second, in the discourse practice analysis, drug addiction is a mental disease that needs treatment, so systematic management by the state is required. Third, in the socio-cultural practice analysis, drug addiction is a means of making money for economic benefit, is related to corruption of political power, and is an object that should be strongly controlled to prevent drug crimes from threatening the foundation of the state. Culturally, drug addiction stems from the motivation of pleasure seeking, and is the result of moral degradation. Through this analysis, the conversion to the 'disease-treatment' discourse and drug policies centered on treatment and rehabilitation were suggested as alternatives.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.68 no.2
• /
• pp.131-160
• /
• 2016

In this study, we analyzed determination of punishment of victimizers presented in sentencing(81 plaintiffs, 95 sentencing) for 55 cases involving child maltreatment fatalities between 2001 and 2015. The results showed that about 40% of main victimizers were imposed relatively minor punishment such as probation or imprisonment for less than 3 years. Judgments that deviated from lower limit comprised large proportion in connection with compliance with standards for statutory punishment and punishment determination. The elements of punishment determination, such as earnest rearing of child, psychological pain arising from death of child, sense of guilt, motivation that can be considered, were found to have a significant influence on mitigation of punishment although such elements could be judged differently, depending on perception or subjective tendency of judges towards child abuse. Even abetters in a position to prevent death of child were imposed minor punishment mostly by probation or monetary penalty. This study presented the need to reconsider the circumstances of punishment determination which has been conventionally mentioned in cases involving child maltreatment fatalities, such as first offender, accidental crime, person with parental rights, fosters, agreement with family of the deceased, etc. Moreover, this study suggested the need to reinforce child abuse prevention training for law enforcement officers and to revamp standards for determining punishment unique to the cases of child abuse in the future.