In the case of crimes related to public order unlike murder or thief is not easy to ascertain what is a concrete harm. As a result, it happens that we can not know who is the victim. It is called “victimless crime”. There is controversy that it is necessary weather it would be defined as a crime and punished. Although victimless crime could be morally condemned because of personality of the actor, but it can be questionable that it should be punished as a crime because harm is not explicitly revealed. Even if there would not occur harm or damage to anyone because of those behavior, it is necessary to define as a crime and punish it because the society makes harm to yourself a standard for judging what is illegal. Communitarianism commands that violating behavior to their own happiness as well as others’ happiness should be regulated by law because it regards human being as the social being. In determining the policy for victimless crime, the efficiency as well as the legitimacy should also be a significant factor. That is th why on the one hand, the policy is formed by the perception of social ethics or justice, on the other hand, by social utility or efficiency. We need cautious policy approach for it because the regulatory policy for victimless crime may decrease the effectiveness of law enforcement.
I. 들어가는 말
II. 피해자 없는 범죄와 그 피해 요소
III. 피해자 없는 범죄에 대한 규제의 정당성
IV. 피해자 없는 범죄에 대한 규제의 효율성
V. 결론에 대신하여 – 피해자 없는 범죄의 규제에 관한 방향
(0)
(0)