조선시대 «大明律» 不應爲조에 관한 연구 (The Study of the Article of Doing What Should Not Be Done of the Great Ming Code in the Joseon Dynasty)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국법사학회
· 수록지 정보 : 법사학연구 / 49호 / 7 ~ 43페이지
· 저자명 : 김대홍

초록

≪大明律≫ 不應爲조는 마땅히 해서는 안 되는 행위를 처벌하는 포괄규정에 해당한다. 본연구에서는 不應爲조를 不應得爲의 罪名과 笞40․杖80의 刑名의 측면으로 나누어 분석을 시도하였다. 律文에 正條가 없는 상황을 전제하고 있는 斷罪無正條조와의 관계, 事理의 輕重의 법적 의미가 ≪大明律≫ 不應爲조의 주요한 연구대상이다. 이와 함께 조선왕조실록의 기사를 중심으로 不應爲조가 실제 적용된 사례를 분석하였다. 法司와 신료들의 논의에서 나타난 不應爲조의 조율과정과 국왕의 최종적인 처결을 연구대상으로 하여 조선 형사사법에서 ≪大明律≫ 不應爲조가 가지는 의의를 규명하였다.

영어초록

When there are neither specific nor analogical articles applicable to cases,criminals are punished by application of the article of Doing What ShouldNot Be Done of the Great Ming Code. Doing what should not be done meansany sorts of behaviors that violate social norms. Thus the article of DoingWhat Should Not Be Done is a typical example of sweeping or catch-allstatutes. The article of Doing What Should Not Be Done makes a distinctionbetween criminal codes and morals unclear. This reflects the legal philosophyin the Great Ming Code, that what is wrong morally is also wrong legally.
Since no specific type of behavior is stipulated in the article of Doing WhatShould Not Be Done, it is possible that punishment by application of the articleimposed arbitrarily. In order to prevent the abuse of the article, the articleof Doing What Should Not Be Done stipulates mild penalty and is temporarilyapplied to exceptional cases where no other article of the Great Ming Codeis applicable. Judiciary officials in the Joseon dynasty comprehendedadequately the meaning of the article of Doing What Should Not Be Done and the relationship with other articles in the Great Ming Code that was thebasic criminal code throughout the Joseon dynasty. They also recognized thepossibility of the arbitrary application the article. Normative discussions forcriminal cases were animated for discreet application of the article of DoingWhat Should Not Be Done. At least judicial officials in the central judicatureof the Joseon dynasty did not rely on the sweeping or catch-all statute forhard cases without logical reasoning.

참고자료

· 없음