Article 27-2 of the Penal Code in Japan requires that `partial suspension of execution of the sentence' should be judged in view of `the necessity and appropriateness of preventing re-offending'. Some, on the other hand, argue that `partial suspension of execution of the sentence' should be "balanced" with the criminal responsibility of the offender, which is greater than that of those whose execution of the sentence is fully suspended and is smaller than that of those whose sentence is partially executed. However, I think that this method of judgment ignores the requirements of Article 27-2, simply imposing the `penalty' in the community, which has no desirable effect on the offender's rehabilitation. Furthermore, such method of judgment might assign a longer `penalty' to the offender whose sentence had been fully executed with short or no parole term, because of his/her criminal responsibility. In this paper, I reconsider the discussion on `partial suspension of execution of the sentence' and `full suspension of execution of the sentence' in order to clarify the image of those whose sentence is `partially suspended' under Article 27-2. Through this process, I argue that `partial suspension of execution of the sentence' should be determined with sufficient consideration of `the necessity and appropriateness of preventing reoffending.

一橋大学大学院法学研究科

2015-03-10

Japanese(jpn)

departmental bulletin paper

VoR

10.15057/27167

1347-0388

AA1161370X

一橋法学

14

1

211

237

14巻1号(2015.3)

https://hdl.handle.net/10086/27167