사회의 급속한 발전으로 말미암아 범죄유형의 다양화가 본격화되고 있으며 각종 다양한 신종 범죄 약시 지속적으로 출현하고 있다. 이는 범죄에 대한 보다 다각적인 대응을 필요로 한다는 것을 의미하는 것이지만 경찰 인력을 무한정 확장할 수 없는 상황은 범죄에 대한 실효적인 대응을 더욱 어렵게 하고 있다. 이로 인하여 최근 치안 거버넌스에 대한 관심이 본격화되고 있는데 이는 경찰목적의 실효적인 달성을 위하여 상호 독립적인 의사를 보유하는 경찰과 사적 단체가 협조하는 형식, 즉 공적인 영역과 사적인 영역 간 협력치안을 구현하는 하나의 형식을 의미한다. 우리나라 역시 경찰력의 부족을 보완하기 위하여 협력치안에 대한 다양한 논의가 전개되고 있는 것이 사실인데 그 중 대표적인 논의 중 하나가 바로 자율방범대이다. 더욱이 최근 「자율방범대 설치 및 운영에 관한 법률」이 제정되었고 올해 발효를 앞두고 있는 상황에서 사적인 실체와 경찰 간 협업의 가능성을 전제로 이의 운영을 보다 실효적으로 도모하기 위한 논의가 다각적으로 전개되고 있는 것이 사실이다. 다만 현 법률에서는 다소 일반적이고 원칙적인 사항에 집중한 나머지 경찰과 자율방범대 간 협력을 보다 실효적으로 유인하기 위한 보다 실제적인 규정을 많이 가지고 있지는 않다. 다만 당해 사항은 헌법적합성의 문제라기보다는 입법정책의 문제, 즉 적정한 정책 설정의 문제라는 점에서 비교법적인 논의의 필요성을 인정할 수 있고 이에 따라 민간과의 경찰협력에 적극적인 입장을 고수하고 있는 영국의 사례를 참고할 수 있다. 특히 영국은 공동체지원경찰관과 특별경찰관 등의 자원경찰관제도를 통하여 협력치안을 구체화하고 있는데 특히 경찰업무와 본업과의 연계 가능성을 제고하기 위한 노력을 경주하고 있을 뿐만 아니라 자원경찰관의 기능을 상당히 명확하게 나누어 제도 운영의 실효성을 제고하고 있다. 뿐만 아니라 개별적인 수준의 인센티브의 지급을 통하여 보다 실제적인 참여 동기를 부여하고 있기도 하다. 자발적인 참여를 전제로 운영되는 자율방범대의 본래적 특징을 고려한다면 영국과 같은 보다 적극적인 유인책을 확보하기 위한 노력을 경주하여야 할 것이다.
Due to the rapid development of society, the diversification of crime types is in full swing, and various new crimes are continuously appearing. This means that a more diverse response to crime is required, but the situation in which police personnel cannot be expanded indefinitely makes it more difficult to respond effectively to crime. As a result, interest in security governance has recently begun in earnest, which means that police and private organizations with independent intentions cooperate to effectively achieve police purposes, that is, a form of implementing cooperative security between public and private areas. It is true that various discussions on cooperative security are being conducted in Korea to compensate for the lack of police power, and one of the representative discussions is the autonomous crime prevention team. Moreover, the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Self-Defense Forces has recently been enacted and discussions are being held to promote its operation more effectively on the premise of collaboration between private entities and police officers. However, the current law does not have many more practical regulations to more effectively induce cooperation between the police and autonomous crime prevention units because it focuses on somewhat general and principled matters. However, the need for comparative legal discussions can be recognized in that the matter is a matter of legislative policy rather than a matter of constitutional suitability, that is, an appropriate policy setting, and accordingly, the case of the UK, which maintains an active position in police cooperation with the private sector can be referred to. In particular, the UK embodies cooperative measures through the resource police officer system such as community support police officers and special police officers, especially efforts are being made to improve the possibility of linking police work and main work, and the effectiveness of the system operation is improved by dividing the function of resource police officers quite clearly. In addition, it also gives more practical motivation to participate through the payment of individual levels of incentives. Considering the original characteristics of the autonomous crime prevention squad operated on the premise of voluntary participation, efforts should be made to secure more active incentives like the UK.
Due to the rapid development of society, the diversification of crime types is in full swing, and various new crimes are continuously appearing. This means that a more diverse response to crime is required, but the situation in which police personnel cannot be expanded indefinitely makes it more difficult to respond effectively to crime. As a result, interest in security governance has recently begun in earnest, which means that police and private organizations with independent intentions cooperate to effectively achieve police purposes, that is, a form of implementing cooperative security between public and private areas. It is true that various discussions on cooperative security are being conducted in Korea to compensate for the lack of police power, and one of the representative discussions is the autonomous crime prevention team. Moreover, the Act on the Establishment and Operation of Self-Defense Forces has recently been enacted and discussions are being held to promote its operation more effectively on the premise of collaboration between private entities and police officers. However, the current law does not have many more practical regulations to more effectively induce cooperation between the police and autonomous crime prevention units because it focuses on somewhat general and principled matters. However, the need for comparative legal discussions can be recognized in that the matter is a matter of legislative policy rather than a matter of constitutional suitability, that is, an appropriate policy setting, and accordingly, the case of the UK, which maintains an active position in police cooperation with the private sector can be referred to. In particular, the UK embodies cooperative measures through the resource police officer system such as community support police officers and special police officers, especially efforts are being made to improve the possibility of linking police work and main work, and the effectiveness of the system operation is improved by dividing the function of resource police officers quite clearly. In addition, it also gives more practical motivation to participate through the payment of individual levels of incentives. Considering the original characteristics of the autonomous crime prevention squad operated on the premise of voluntary participation, efforts should be made to secure more active incentives like the UK.