본 논문에서는 스포츠 활동 중 상해 결과라는 결과불법에 대하여 어디까지 그 상해를 형법상 허용할 것이며, 만약 허용된다면 허용하는 형법상의 정당성의 근거가 무엇인가를 연구하였다. 이를 위해서 상해의 위험성이 큰 스포츠를 유형별로 분류하고, 그 각각에 대하여 정당화 근거를 검토하였다. 그 결과 첫째, 상해를 목적으로 하는 스포츠의 경우, 경기규칙 내에서 또는 경미한 규칙위반으로 인한 상해는 ‘피해자 승낙이론’이 타당하며, 사망이나 중상해의 경우는 ‘업무로 인한 행위’나 ‘기타 사회상규에 위배되지 아니한 행위’ 등의 이론을 적용하는 것이 타당하다. 그러나 경기규칙의 중대한 위반으로 인한 사망이나 중상해 등은 형법의 일반 범죄행위와 동일하게 취급하면 될 것이다. 둘째, 상해의 위험성을 수반하는 스포츠의 경우, 규칙 내에서 또는 경미한 규칙위반으로 인한 상해는 피해자가 예상할 수 있기 때문에 ‘피해자 승낙이론’이 타당하며, 사망이나 중상해의 경우에는 ‘위험인수이론’이 가장 타당하다고 본다. 그러나 중대한 규칙위반으로 인한 상해나 사망의 경우는 일반적인 형법상 범죄로 해결하면 될 것이다. 셋째, 병렬적 스포츠의 경우, 자전거 경기 등과 같이 어느 정도 상해에 대한 위험성을 예상할 수 있는 경우에는 앞에서 언급한 상해의 위험을 수반하는 스포츠의 경우와 동일하게 처리하면 될 것이며, 투포환 등의 비격투형 개인종목의 경우에는 경기 내용에 위험성이 적기 때문에 ‘사회적 상당성’이론으로 판단하면 될 것이다.

This paper has attempted to investigate the scope of sports injury and the grounds for the justification of the injury in criminal law. For this, the sports events with a high risk of injury have been categorized by type, and their individual ground for the justification of sports injury has been examined. As a result, the following results have been obtained: First, in case of sports events that are aimed to injure the opponent, it is reasonable to apply 'victim's consent theory' to minor injury which took place while the rules were oserved or slightly violated and 'actions during on-duty time' or 'actions that do not violate other social morals' to heavy injury or death. However, the heavy wound or death caused by major violation of rules could be treated as ordinary crime. Second, in case of sports events with a high risk of injury, it is reasonable to apply 'victim's consent theory' to minor injury which took place while the rules were observed or slightly violated and 'risk acceptance theory' to heavy injury or death. However, the heavy wound or death caused by major violation of rules could be treated as ordinary crime as well. Third, in case of parallel sports with a mild risk of injury such as cycling, they should be treated like the sports events with a risk of injury mentioned above. In case of non-fighting individual sports events with a low risk of injury such as the shot put, it seems reasonable to apply 'social reasonability theory.

This paper has attempted to investigate the scope of sports injury and the grounds for the justification of the injury in criminal law. For this, the sports events with a high risk of injury have been categorized by type, and their individual ground for the justification of sports injury has been examined. As a result, the following results have been obtained: First, in case of sports events that are aimed to injure the opponent, it is reasonable to apply 'victim's consent theory' to minor injury which took place while the rules were oserved or slightly violated and 'actions during on-duty time' or 'actions that do not violate other social morals' to heavy injury or death. However, the heavy wound or death caused by major violation of rules could be treated as ordinary crime. Second, in case of sports events with a high risk of injury, it is reasonable to apply 'victim's consent theory' to minor injury which took place while the rules were observed or slightly violated and 'risk acceptance theory' to heavy injury or death. However, the heavy wound or death caused by major violation of rules could be treated as ordinary crime as well. Third, in case of parallel sports with a mild risk of injury such as cycling, they should be treated like the sports events with a risk of injury mentioned above. In case of non-fighting individual sports events with a low risk of injury such as the shot put, it seems reasonable to apply 'social reasonability theory.

, , , ,

Sports, Justification of Sports Injury, Victim's Consent, Opposite Sports, Parallel Sports