폐하 심기 경호를 그만두는 형법 -독일의 `외국원수모욕죄` 폐지에 착안한 `국교에 관한 죄` 개선안- = Lese-majeste Moving Away from the German Criminal Code -A Commentary upon Bohmermann Affair and § 103 StGB-

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

On the ZDF television show “Neo Magazin Royale” in late March 2016, Jan Bohmermann, a German comedian, insulted the Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, with a poem describing him as a man who loves to “fuck goats and repress minorities, kick Kurds, hit Christians while watching child pornography.” This satirical poem did not come out of the blue; by reading it, Bohmermann criticised Erdogan for his human rights abuses and autocratic tendencies.
The Turkish government thereupon sent a formal request to the German cabinet to prosecute Bohmermann for violating § 103 of the German Criminal Code (StGB), and Berlin accepted the request from Ankara. § 103 StGB says that whosoever insults a foreign head of state [...] shall be liable to imprisonment not exceeding three years or a fine, in case of a slanderous insult to imprisonment from three months to five years“. The penalty under this section is thus higher than that under §§ 185 et. seq. StGB (insult, defamation and intentional defamation).
The prosecution of Bohmermann has triggered a debate on raison d`etre of § 103 StGB which grants privileges to foreign heads of states and is hence known as “lese-majesty-paragraph”. The answer to this question primarily depends on which legal goods (Rechtsguter ) § 103 StGB protects and on whether this provision ist appropriate and necessary for the protection of such legal goods, which were dealt with in this paper:
Some maintain that § 103 StGB protects dignity of foreign leaders and their countries. According to them, already the heading of Chapter 3 StGB (“offence against foreign states”) to which § 103 StGB belongs indicates that this section protects the interests of foreign states. They are also of the opinion that § 103 StGB is required to fulfil obligations of international law such as aut dedere aut judicare. In addition, they assert that only their view can explain why § 104a StGB describes “a request to prosecute by the foreign government” as a prerequisite for prosecution for violating of § 103 StGB.
This article, however, does not share that point of view, for the following reasons: Firstly, the heading of Chapter 3 StGB does not provide a compelling argument for considering § 103 StGB as a provision for foreign states. Because it refers to the object of action which should be distinguished from the protected legal good of an offence. Secondly, there are no international regulations which oblige states to protect dignity of foreign leaders through criminal law. If one nevertheless regards § 103 StGB as an altruistic norm, then it ironically follows that dictators enjoy greater protection than democratic leaders. In this case, thirdly, four conditions for prosecutions in § 104a StGB cannot be consistently interpreted. And last but not least, in the light of the ultima ratio principle, it is neither justified nor required to extend the range of the state`s penal power to cover the interests of foreign states, which are not directly related to basic requirements for ordered communal life.
The above analysis suggests that § 103 StGB does not guarantee foreign interests, but rather German. Indeed, the provisions of Chapter 3 StGB can be harmonized with one another, if one sees their goals in protection minimum conditions for effective relationship between Germany and foreign states. Whether § 103 StGB is necessary, is nonetheless doubtful, since it is neither a democratic idea nor the duty under international law to protect dignity of foreign heads of state more strongly than that of normal citizens by means of specific regulations. Furthermore, § 103 StGB could undermine freedom of expression. It is therefore desirable to get rid of § 103 StGB.
In June 2017, the Bundestag decided to delete § 103 StGB for the reasons mentioned above. This decision which will come into effect in January 2018 provides pointers for the improvement of the Korean Criminal Act; it indicates that both § 107 para. 2 and § 108 para. 2 of the Korean Criminal Act could be archaic, undemocratic and disproportionate, since they are similar to § 103 StGB. In short, consideration should be given to the removing those two paragraphs.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 오영근, "형법총론 제3판" 박영사 2014
• 2 임웅, "형법총론" 법문사 2016
• 3 오영근, "형법각론 제3판" 박영사 2014
• 4 김성돈, "형법각론" 성균관대학교 출판부 2016
• 5 배종대, "형법각론" 홍문사 2015
• 6 "헌재 2015. 2. 26. 2009헌바17 등, 판례집 27-1상, 20"
• 7 "헌재 2013. 12. 26. 2009헌마747, 판례집 25-2하, 745"
• 8 하채림, "터키 13년 만에 유럽평의회 ‘인권・민주주의 감시등급’ 강등" 연합뉴스
• 9 이광철, "유엔 ‘터키, 쿠르드족 진압 중 심각한 인권유린’" 연합뉴스
• 10 김일수, "새로쓴 형법각론" 박영사 2016
• 11 Schelzke, R. C., "Ändert Jan Böhmermann das Strafgesetzbuch?" 248-, 2016
• 12 Mitsch, W., "Zwischenruf: § 103 StGB"
• 13 Geisler, C., "Zur Vereinbarkeit objektiver Bedingungen der Strafbarkeit mit dem Schuldprinzip" 1998
• 14 "Wissenschaftliche Dienste des Deutschen Bundestages, Straftaten gegen ausländische Staaten (§§ 102-104 StGB) im Lichte des völkerrechtlichen Prinzips der “Staatenehre”"
• 15 von Arnauld, A., "Völkerrecht" 2014
• 16 Bauer, G., "Vor §§ 102 ff., LK-StGB, 4. Bd." 2007
• 17 Wolter, J., "Vor § 102 ff.,SK-StGB, Bd. III" 2012
• 18 Wohlers, W., "Vor § 102 ff., NK-StGB, Bd. 2" 2013
• 19 Kreß, C., "Vor § 102 ff, MK-StGB, Bd. 3" 2012
• 20 Hassemer, W., "Vor § 1, NK-StGB, Bd. 1" 2013
• 21 UN, "Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961"
• 22 Heinke, D. H., "Unzulässiges Festhalten an einer überkommenen Strafnorm" 121-, 2016
• 23 "Türkei verlangte offenbar Löschung des “Extra 3”-Videos"
• 24 Galicki, Z., "The Obligation to Extradite or Prosecute (aut dedere aut judicare)"
• 25 UN, "The Obligation to Extradite or Prosecute (aut dedere aut judicar e)"
• 26 Schmidhäuser, E., "Strafrecht BT" 1983
• 27 Blei, H., "Strafrecht BT" 1983
• 28 Roxin, C., "Strafrecht AT, Bd. I" 2006
• 29 Wikisource, "Strafgesetzbuch für das Deutsche Reich (1871)"
• 30 "Staatsaffäre Böhmermann"
• 31 Kunig, P., "Staatenehre im Völkerrecht" 160-, 1998
• 32 Heinze, A., "Lex non grata" 767-, 2016
• 33 Jescheck, H.-H., "Lehrbuch des Strafrechts AT" 1996
• 34 "Kabinett will Majestätsbeleidigung erst 2018 abschaffen"
• 35 UN, "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights"
• 36 "Ermittlungen gegen Böhmermann eingestellt"
• 37 "Erdoğan stellt offiziell Strafantrag gegen Böhmermann"
• 38 Bundesrat, "Drucksache 214/16"
• 39 Deutscher Bundestag, "Drucksache 18/8123"
• 40 Deutscher Bundestag, "Drucksache 18/11243"
• 41 "Dieser Paragraf soll jetzt abgeschafft werden"
• 42 Kühne, H.-H., "Der strafrechtliche Ehrenschutz ausländischer Staatsoberhäupter als Instrument des Imports freiheitsfeindlicher Vorstellungen?" 435-, 2016
• 43 Dreher, E., "Das Dritte Strafrechtsänderungsgesetz" 421-, 1953
• 44 UN, "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents 1973"
• 45 Fahl, C., "Böhmermanns Schmähkritik als Beleidigung" 313-, 2016
• 46 Sack-Reiß, K., "Böhmermann beleidigt Queen Elizabeth zu ihrem 90." Welt
• 47 Deutscher Bundestag, "Bundestag streicht den Paragrafen zur Majestätsbeleidigung"
• 48 "Bundesregierung lässt Strafverfahren gegen Böhmermann zu"
• 49 BVerfG, "Beschluss des Zweiten Senats vom 26. Februar 2008 — 2 BvR 392/07"