본 논문의 목적은 일본에서 판례와 학설의 지지를 받고 있는 가벌적 위법성론의 의미를 재음미하는데 있다. 가벌적 위법성론은 구성요건에 해당하는 행위이지만 그 행위가 당해 구성요건이 예상하는 정도의 실질적 위법성을 결한 경우에 구성요건해당성 내지 위법성을 부정하자는 이론으로 일본에서 판례가 인정한 이래 학설의 지지를 받고 있는 이론이다. 그러나 우리나라에서는 가벌적 위법성론이 지지를 받지 못하고 있다. 그 중요한 이유 중의 하나는 우리 형법 제20조가 가벌적 위법성론의 기능을 수행할 수 있는 있는 위법성조각사유로 ‘사회상규’를 규정하고 있기 때문이다. 따라서 가벌적 위법성론이 상정하고 있는 가벌적 위법성이 없는 행위는 사회상규로 포섭될 가능성이 높고 이러한 이유 때문에 가벌적 위법성론은 도입할 필요성이 없는 이론으로 평가받고 있다. 그럼에도 불구하고 가벌적 위법성론은 국가의 형벌권 운용에 있어 많은 시사점을 제시하고 있다. 그 중 중요한 것 하나가 바로 형벌 억제사상이다. 현재 우리나라의 형사사법은 필벌주의와 겸억주의가 뒤바뀌어 운용되고 있는 현실이다. 이러한 상황에서 가벌적 위법성론이 가지고 있는 형벌 억제사상은 법원이 사회상규를 해석ㆍ적용할 때 적극적으로 고려하여야 할 내용이라 평가할 수 있다.

The purpose of this study is to review of the theory of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’. Theory of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’ is relevant to the condition of crime constitution but punishment is impossible because real illegality is not equipped. Most scholars have been supporting this theology since Japanese precedent approved it. But presently the theory of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’ is not supported in Korea. The main reason is that Article20 of the Criminal Code regulates the social aspect as similar case of 'Strafbares Unrecht' in Korea. The main reason is that Article 20(Justifiable Act) of the Criminal Code regulates the social mores as similar case of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’ in Korea. Based on this regulation, it is relevant to condition of crime constitution but punishment is not executed by removal of illegality. So, it is evaluated that Theory of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’ is not necessary to be introduced to Korean Criminal Code especially. Even though that, theory of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’ proposes many suggestions to operate the national punishment right. One of suggestions is the restraint of punishment. At present, heavy penalty of legislation for crime cases is getting higher. Also it is serious that improper use of punishment right in operation of criminal law. The restraint ideas of punishment belonging to Theory of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’, are the question to be considered by Korean criminal law in this reality.

The purpose of this study is to review of the theory of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’. Theory of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’ is relevant to the condition of crime constitution but punishment is impossible because real illegality is not equipped. Most scholars have been supporting this theology since Japanese precedent approved it. But presently the theory of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’ is not supported in Korea. The main reason is that Article20 of the Criminal Code regulates the social aspect as similar case of 'Strafbares Unrecht' in Korea. The main reason is that Article 20(Justifiable Act) of the Criminal Code regulates the social mores as similar case of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’ in Korea. Based on this regulation, it is relevant to condition of crime constitution but punishment is not executed by removal of illegality. So, it is evaluated that Theory of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’ is not necessary to be introduced to Korean Criminal Code especially. Even though that, theory of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’ proposes many suggestions to operate the national punishment right. One of suggestions is the restraint of punishment. At present, heavy penalty of legislation for crime cases is getting higher. Also it is serious that improper use of punishment right in operation of criminal law. The restraint ideas of punishment belonging to Theory of ‘Strafbares Unrecht’, are the question to be considered by Korean criminal law in this reality.

Strafbares Unrecht, social mores, illegality, Article 20(Justifiable Act).