소년의 미성숙 뇌에 관한 연구와 형사책임 - 미국의 Roper 판례에 대한 분석과 우리나라에의 시사점 -

Abstract

Neurosciencs has also been offered in criminal just system. In the United States neuroscientific evidence has already reached the courtroom in at least some important legal contexts. For example, preliminary assessments by Nita Farahany indicate a rapid rate of growth, with twice as many reported cases involving neuroscientific evidence in 2009 as in 2006. First, brain images are increasingly proffered by the defense at the criminal responsibility phase, in an effort to prove an insanity defense. Second, brain images are also proffered at the sentencing phase of criminal cases in an effort to support a lenient sentence. A convicted murderer sought to introduce brain images of abnormalities, in hopes of supporting and securing a more lenient sentence. Developmental neuroscience of adolescent behavior is beginning to offer important legally relevant insights. In Roper v. Simmons Case, the Court ruled 5-4 that 8th and 14th amendments of the Constitution prohibited the death penalty for those who were under 18 years of age when committing a capital crime. Several of amicus briefs tell us that developments in psychology and brain science continue to show fundamental differences between juvenile and adult minds. For example,parts of the brain involved in behavior control continue to mature through late adolescence. In Korea, Juvenile Law is prohibited the death penalty and life in prison for those who were under 18 years of age when committing a capital crime. But It is possible for court to hand out death penalty and life in prison at 18 ages at the time of crime. We should consider and propose that Juvenile Law is reformed and accepted a more lenient sentencing in the light of adolescent neuroscientific findings. Neuroscience should be playing some modest role in affecting legislative enactment and juvenile criminal policy.