• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.83-107
• /
• 2019

This article focuses on §10 of Criminal Act of the Republic of Korea to discuss how to determine criminal responsibility of a perpetrator suffering from mental disorders, while reviewing existing process and standards of mental examination at each stage of the criminal procedure as well as exploring suggestions regarding how they should be complied. The determination of the sanity or criminal responsibility of the mentally ill as defined in the §10 of Criminal Act, by its nature, cannot be approached with a traditional, clear-cut dichotomy of biology by medical practitioner and psychology·normative science by lawyer. Looking into the actual procedure of determining mental and physical disorder with special consideration of mental illness reveals the inevitability of collaboration between lawyers and psychiatrists. In the meantime, the process and standards of mental examination at each stage of the criminal procedure must be definitive and clear. First of all, during the investigation stage, examination prior to prosecution should be more actively encouraged, considering that judging sanity of the perpetrator at the time of committing a criminal act is important. During the trial stage, the mandatory examination must be conducted depending on the sensitivity and gravity of the case. Next, medical examination to determine criminal responsibility and the one to order treatment and custody must be separately conducted in order to properly execute medical treatment and custody. Obligatory mental examination could be considered both during the stage of request for and execution of the treatment and custody. Lastly, the procedure of examination and format of examination documents need to be standardized for better objectivity and reliability.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.19 no.10
• /
• pp.21-28
• /
• 2021

This study examines factors affecting correction officer's preference toward institute for forensic psychiatric. The data were collected from the correction officers who worked at the six correctional facilities in 2019. Binary logistic regression was used to find the factors on the officer's preference. The result showed that the correction officers had their own preference toward prison for forensic psychiatric, and the preference was positively related to the age of the officer, work experience at the mental health center, mentally-ill prisoner's fighting as the rule-violation in prison, refusal of medical treatment, and lack of laws and regulations for the mentally-ill prisoners. In contrast, there was a negative relationship between the officer's rank and the preference for forensic psychiatric. More work needs to be done in the future research to collect more samples and include a broader ranger of variables than now.