가석방 없는 무기형 입법안에 대한 검토

Abstract

A series of ‘motiveless crime’ and ‘heinous crimes’ caused public resentment, and as a result, the need for violent punishment emerged, a revision to the life without parole was announced. If this amendment is not supplemented and passed as it is, many problems can arise. Therefore, this paper aims to be of some help in reflecting the amendment by identifying the problems that may arise from the revision of the law from various aspects and seeking countermeasures.
 The research method is to examine the pros and cons of the life without parole based on Internet articles, examine the life sentence system and punishment through domestic and foreign papers, examine various problems and suggest countermeasures through the life sentence amendment.
 As a result of the study, life imprisonment is a punishment that violates constitutional rights, such as human dignity and values, equal rights, and the right to uphold freedom of the body. The purpose of edification, the ideology of correctional facilities, cannot be achieved, and external transportation rights with families are likely to be violated considerably. Therefore, life sentences should be revised to the extent that such infringement of rights is minimized. The plan should establish a reduction regulation for life imprisonment without parole so that inmates with good correctional performance can be reduced. In addition, through the revision of Article 41 of the Criminal Code, a first-class life sentence and a second-class life sentence should be created. The first-degree life sentence refers to a punishment in the middle of the death penalty and life imprisonment, and the second-degree life sentence refers to a life sentence currently in effect. Parole shall be allowed for first-degree life imprisonment prisoners, but the period of parole shall be extended, and the period of parole and probation shall be extended upon parole.
 In conclusion, life imprisonment is likely to violate the constitutionally guaranteed rights of criminals, does not conform to the correction ideology of correctional facilities, and can only realize the purpose of isolation from society forever. Therefore, if this amendment is forced to be implemented, it should be implemented to the extent that various opinions are collected and the purpose of correction and punishment is achieved by referring to this paper, and human rights violations under the constitution can be minimized.