• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.27 no.3
• /
• pp.149-155
• /
• 2022

The view of not fully denying the application of accomplice regulations to non-punishable opponents has fallen into a formal and logical circular argument that only provides formal grounds for non-punishment and has failed to provide practical grounds. In addition, it can be said that it has a criminal policy problem contrary to the legal sentiment of the general public by not punishing the active government travel activities of non-punishable accomplices. Therefore, in order to solve this problem, it is necessary to respect the legislator's intention that general non-punishment accomplices can be punished if they exceed the 'minimum government travel commission'. Therefore, if an unpunishable accomplice acts at least within the act required to realize the constituent requirements, the application of the accomplice regulations shall be excluded, and the accomplice regulations shall be applied only if they exceed that extent. In addition, if the indispensable counterparty is a protected person or has no responsibility (possibility of expectation), it can be said that it has provided a practical basis for the inability to punish, so it can be understood as impossible to punish. This interpretation method is thought to be able to present concrete validity in marginal cases where the counterparty is more responsible by substantially presenting the basis for an unpunishable accomplice.

• Journal of the Korean Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.201-211
• /
• 1999

Objectives：This study investigated the characteristics of detained delinquent adolescents and variables related to the repeated crime during 6 months after release. Methods：The socio-demographic and crime-related characteristics of 73 detained adolescents were evaluated by semi-structured interviews and police records, and the psychological characteristics of them measured by the MMPI. We also compared the characteristics between subjects with and without repeated crime during 6 months after release. Results：1) Most of detained adolescents had families with low socioeconomic status(77%) and broken families(48%). Sixty-six percent of them were dropped out of school. The most frequent crime pattern was theft(49%), and with accomplice(77%). Seventy-five percent of total subjects had the records of previous conviction. Of the previous convictions, seventy-eight percent was same with the present crimes. 2) Subjects with repeated crime during 6 months after release were younger and had higher T-score on Pa scale of MMPI than the subjects without repeated crime. More adolescents with repeated crime had broken families than those without repeated crime. They also showed the crime-related characteristics of higher percent of theft among crime patterns, higher incidence of previous conviction, younger age of the first crime, and shorter crime-free duration from the last to present crime. Conclusion：These results of present study suggest that the development and the persistence of adolescent delinquency would be resulted from interaction of factors of individual, family, school, and community. By the comparison between subjects with and without repeated crime, it was found that familial dysfunction, younger age at first crime, presence of previous conviction might be the risk factors for repeated delinquency. To prevent repeated crime of delinquent adolescents more effectively, early therapeutic intervention and the development of programs to help adaptation in school and community would be essential.