범죄수익의 효과적 박탈을 위한 불법자금 동결방안

A Solution for Freezing of Illegal Fund

이 글은 범죄수익규제법상의 범죄수익박탈제도의 전제가 되는 마약류특례법상의 보전제도가 불법자금 동결제도로서의 역할을 제대로 수행하고 있는지에 대해서 검증하는 한편, 보전제도의 이론적 문제점을 개선할 수 있는 방안을 제시하고자 한다. 그래서 현행 몰수ㆍ추징보전제도가 ① 현상의 유지라는 동결제도의 취지를 제대로 살리지 못하고 있고, ② 동결에 관한 국제적인 표준에 부합되지 못하며, ③ 제3자 재산과 범죄피해재산에 대한 보전 및 법인재산에 대한 박탈이 불가능하고, ④ 보전제도에 민사집행법의 법리와 규정을 차용하면서도 핵심적인 내용은 반영하지 못하였으며, ⑤ 중대범죄에 지원된 자금에 대한 동결제도를 제대로 마련하지 못하는 등의 이유로 불법자금 동결제도로서의 역할을 제대로 수행하기 어렵다는 문제점을 도출하는 한편, 그 대안으로서 ① 범죄관련 재산 전부의 몰수보전, ② 가처분적 몰수보전 명령제도의 도입, ③ 재산조회제도의 도입, ④ 박탈불가재산의 보상ㆍ환원절차 마련, ⑤ 몰수자산기금제도의 도입 등의 범죄수익규제법 개정방안을 제시하였다.

'The Law of Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds' was enacted to take actions against organizational crimes and other serious crimes and to be based on criminal proceeds confiscation system as well as 'Illegal Fund Freezing System'. There were three kinds of routes of crimes, that is to say, serious crime creating high level criminal proceeds, money-laundering crime that concealed and disguised criminal proceeds as legal fund, and fund support for criminals and criminal organizations that planned serious crimes. The purpose of enactment of the law was to block the three kinds of fund routes thoroughly and destroy economic base of criminals and criminal organizations and to control recurrence of serious crimes and to keep sound society order. However, the Law of Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds did not play proper role in enactment purpose of the law. The author's research of 'A Study on the System for Following Illegal Fund' already verified that the criminal proceeds confiscation system itself had difficulties at playing its role: And, the Illegal Fund freezing system was also found to be difficult to play its role as follow: ① The intent of Fund Freezing system that was maintenance of status quo could not be effective. ② International standards of fund freezing could not be satisfied. ③ Not only the third party's properties but also the properties suffered from crimes could not be preserved, and corporate properties could not be deprived. ④ The preservation system could not introduce legal principles and regulations of civil case executive laws, and it did not reflect core contents. ⑤ The fund that supported serious crimes had not freezing system. Therefore, the paper suggested illegal fund freezing as follow: Firstly, all of crime related properties could be frozen. Secondly, the confiscation preservation should allow provisional disposition order.