@article{ART001964959},
author={Ji-Yun Jun},
title={The Comparative Study on the Self-Defense of South and North Criminal Law},
journal={DONG-A LAW REVIEW},
issn={1225-3405},
year={2015},
number={66},
pages={103-136}
TY - JOUR
AU - Ji-Yun Jun
TI - The Comparative Study on the Self-Defense of South and North Criminal Law
JO - DONG-A LAW REVIEW
PY - 2015
VL - null
IS - 66
PB - The Institute for Legal Studies Dong-A University
SP - 103
EP - 136
SN - 1225-3405
AB - Both South and North Criminal Law have a regulation of the self-defense and if the situation corresponds to self-defense, they don't punish the defendant. However, they have important differences between South and North Criminal Law about specific meanings and contexts of self-defense.
First, there are no differences about regulations of self-defense in South and North Criminal Law.
Second, South and North Criminal Law are common that self-defense is an act which has significant reason to protect current unwarranted infringement about self or others' legal interests.
Third, while North Criminal Law admits that self-defense system is a very meaningful in respect of people's struggle against crime, South Criminal Law accepts it in passive sense.
Fourth, North Criminal Law has collectivist characteristic of self-defense, but South Criminal Law is based on two primary benefits which are benefits of self-protection and defense of law and order.
Fifth, among the legal interests protected by the self-defense, there is a dispute that self-defense for national·social legal interests can be adopted in South Korea. In contrast, self-defense is primary understood for national·social legal interests in North Korea.
Sixth, North Criminal Law doesn't bring up the problem about noticeable imbalance when they judge reciprocality of anti-state crime, without regarding to principle of balance. On the other hand, South Criminal Law denies the self-defense because they make a sense the noticeable imbalance of infringement legal interests and protection legal interests exceeds the scope of reciprocality.
Seventh, North Criminal Law accepts both intensive excessive force in self-defense (intensiver Notwehrexzess) and extensive excessive force in self-defense(extensiver Notwehrexzess), while South Criminal Law only admits intensive excessive force in self-defense (majority opinion). North Criminal Law understand that the legal effect of self-defense is the grounds for sentencing. However South Criminal Law comprehends grounds for discretionary or necessary mitigation.
Finally, if murder is happened above the self-defense's extent in North Criminal Law, they reduce a punishment in murder in excess of self-defense which is the lightest penalty, not applies the murder.
KW - Self-defense;North Korean Criminal Law;Criminal Code of North Korea;legal defense;social dangerousness
DO -
UR -
ER -
Ji-Yun Jun. (2015). The Comparative Study on the Self-Defense of South and North Criminal Law. DONG-A LAW REVIEW, 66, 103-136.
Ji-Yun Jun. 2015, "The Comparative Study on the Self-Defense of South and North Criminal Law", DONG-A LAW REVIEW, no.66, pp.103-136.
Ji-Yun Jun "The Comparative Study on the Self-Defense of South and North Criminal Law" DONG-A LAW REVIEW 66 pp.103-136 (2015) : 103.
Ji-Yun Jun. The Comparative Study on the Self-Defense of South and North Criminal Law. 2015; 66 : 103-136.
Ji-Yun Jun. "The Comparative Study on the Self-Defense of South and North Criminal Law" DONG-A LAW REVIEW no.66(2015) : 103-136.
Ji-Yun Jun. The Comparative Study on the Self-Defense of South and North Criminal Law. DONG-A LAW REVIEW, 66, 103-136.
Ji-Yun Jun. The Comparative Study on the Self-Defense of South and North Criminal Law. DONG-A LAW REVIEW. 2015; 66 103-136.
Ji-Yun Jun. The Comparative Study on the Self-Defense of South and North Criminal Law. 2015; 66 : 103-136.
Ji-Yun Jun. "The Comparative Study on the Self-Defense of South and North Criminal Law" DONG-A LAW REVIEW no.66(2015) : 103-136.