행동경제학적 관점에서 바라본 형사조정제도의 방향성

The Direction of the Criminal Adjustment System from the Behavioral Economic Perspective

형사소송에서 형사사건의 피해자는 친고죄와 반의사불벌죄를 제외하고는 일반적으로 형사소송절차 어디에서도 자신의 사건에 관여하기 힘든 구조이다. 이처럼 형사사건의 문제해결에 있어서 피해자의 회복적 감정을 고려하지 않은 채 진행되는 형사소송의 ‘실 체적 진실발견’ 목적은 과연 제대로 정의를 구현하는 것인지 의심받아 왔다. 이로부터 이제 범죄피해의 실질적 회복을 도모하고자 형사조정제도가 2007년 도입되어 10년이 지났다. 그럼에도 실제로 형사소송에서 형사조정이 차지하는 비율은 5.5%로 여전히 매우 낮은데, 이로써 형사조정제도의 실효성이 다시 도전받고 있는 상황이다. 이러한 실효성을 높이기 위해서는 피해자측의 범죄자에 대한 이해가 선행되어야 할것으로 보인다. 그리고 범죄행동에 대한 피해자의 이해를 높이기 위해서 본 논문에서는 행동경제학에서 상정하는 ‘제한된 합리성’을 범죄행동분석에 차용하여 행위자들의 불법 (범죄)으로 나아가는 인식과정을 살펴보았다. 나아가 행동경제학에서 상정하는 인간의 이원론적 인식체계를 통해 국가 및 지역사회가 범죄예방 및 형사조정 합의를 위해 어떤 노력을 기울여야 하는지 그 방향성도 제시해보았다.

A person with a ‘limited rationality’ as envisioned in behavioral economics can make a meaningful change in the criminal law as well, because the criminal adjustment system can also affect the change in the feelings of restoration. At present, the criminal justice system in Korea is still in a state of macroscopic framework, so it is necessary to look at the future direction in detail in the current 10 years. First, the cases that can be referred to by the current criminal justice are ‘property crimes such as fraud, embezzlement, and hunting due to inter-personal money transactions’, ‘accusations of private disputes such as defamation and medical disputes’ Other complaints’ cases. Second, in order to accomplish the purpose of the criminal coordination system of resolving disputes through the local community, it is necessary to improve the conditions to utilize the criminal adjustment system at the stage of transferring the police or transferring the complaint It seems necessary to do. This is in the interest of speeding up the recovery of the victims of crime and in helping them to resolve more voluntary disputes. In addition, since the current system is a non-permanent organization within the prosecution, it is necessary to change into a permanent organization in order to enhance the specialization and effectiveness of the criminal adjustment system, and it needs to be expanded so that criminal adjustment can be achieved at the police and court levels. Third, the actual recovery of crime damage does not simply mean monetary compensation. In fact, according to the results of the study on the restoration of the damage, it is said that the number of cases in which the settlement did not exist was 20.7% in 2010 and increased to 23.3% in 2014. This means that re-storation of the victim ‘s feelings of emotional disturbance must be preceded by monetary compensation and restoration of relationship. Therefore, restoration of mutual trust between the controlling parties through the understanding of the human being assumed in the behavior economics is the most important task to achieve the purpose of the criminal adjustment.