초록 열기/닫기 버튼
기존에는 사기죄적 관점에서 조세포탈죄의 법적 성격을 논의하는 입장이 주류적이었다. 그러나 독일, 일본, 미국과 달리, 우리나라는 형법에 위계공무집행방해죄를 규정하고, 조세포탈죄는 조세 부과권 내지 징수권이라는 국가적 법익을 보호하는 기능적인 측면과 조세범처벌법에 ‘위계’를 필수요소로 규정한 점에서 위계공무집행방해죄로서의 성격이 강하다고 할 수 있다. 그리고 조세포탈죄의 행위수단인 ‘사기나 그 밖의 부정한 행위’와 유사한 행위수단으로 규정된 관세법 등 다수의 특별법위반죄들을 전체적으로 검토하면 조세포탈죄의 행위수단이 ‘사기’로 규정되었다고 하더라도, 이는 다른 특별법에 규정된 ‘거짓 신청’, ‘거짓’, ‘속임수’와 동가치적인 의미가 있다는 점에서 ‘사기’ 문구를 조세포탈죄가 사기죄로서의 법적 성격이 있다는 주장의 실정법적 근거로 삼을 수는 없다. 결국 형법의 위계공무집행방해죄, 조세포탈죄, 조세포탈죄와 유사한 행위수단으로 규정된 특별법위반죄를 종합적으로 검토하면 이들 범죄들은 사인이 부정한 수단을 통해 국가기관의 정당한 심사기능을 저해하여 경제적 이익 내지 유․무형의 이익을 취득하거나 취득할 수 있는 지위를 취득한다는 점에서 모두 위계공무집행방해죄로서의 성격으로 이해함이 타당하다.
Previously, mainstream scholastic views discussed tax evasion crime within the context of ‘fraud crime’. However, it is noteworthy that, unlike that of Germany, Japan, and the United States, tax evasion crime in the Republic of Korea has significant characteristics of ‘Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties by Fraudulent Means’, which is independently stipulated from fraud crime in Criminal Act. Tax evasion crime shares the essential characteristics of ‘Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties by Fraudulent Means’, mainly for the following two reasons. First, the provision prohibiting tax evasion crime purports to protect legal interest of the state such as the authority to impose and collect tax. Second, tax evasion crime shares with ‘Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties by Fraudulent Means’ the exact same requirement for establishment of crime, which is deceptive means’. The fact that requirement for establishment of tax evasion crime is stipulated as ‘fraud’ cannot work as legal basis for the assertion that tax evasion crime falls withing the category of 'fraud crime' because the term ‘fraud’ as used within the context of tax evasion crime merely bares the same meaning as ‘false application’, ‘false’ or ‘deception’ which are used in special tax acts such as Customs Act. In sum, coherent interpretation of provisions such as ‘Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties by Fraudulent Means’, tax evasion crime and other crimes stipulated in special tax acts which share with tax evasion crime the same requirement for establishment draws the conclusion that tax evasion crime falls within the category of ‘Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties by Fraudulent Means’ because a perpetrator of tax evasion crime acquires tangible or intangible benefits by hindering through improper means the state’s proper evaluation.
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
Tax Evasion Crime, Fraud Crime, Obstruction of Performance of Official Duties by Fraudulent Means, Customs Tax Evasion Crime, Active Acts
