자율주행자동차는 운전자의 상시적인 차량 제어가 없어도 스스로 운행하는 자동차를 말한다. 자율성은 0에서 5단계로 구분되고, 4단계부터는 운전자가 차량을 운행할 책임이 완전히 제거된다. 본 논문에서는 자율주행자동차의 운행과 관련하여 형사상 범죄가 발생하였을 때 그 책임귀속 주체에 대하여 논의하여 본다.
먼저 자율주행자동차의 설계자 및 제작자의 책임을 생각해 볼 수 있다. 이들은 자율주행자동차의 판단기준을 제시하였으므로 자율주행자동차가 범죄결과를 발생시킴에 대하여 전체적인 고의가 있다. 그러나 이들이 겪는 딜레마를 고려한다면 이들에게 무제한적으로 형사책임을 묻기 어렵다. 이에 대해 일반조항인 형법 제20조를 적절히 적용․해석하는 것이 요구된다. 한편 설계자․제작자에게 자율주행자동차 하드웨어 및 소프트웨어의 설계․제작에 관한 과실이 있고 그 과실로 인해 범죄결과가 발생하였다면 위 논의와는 별개로 과실범 책임을 질 수 있다.
다음으로 자율주행자동차에 탑승한 사람의 형사책임이 문제된다. 3단계 자율주행자동차의 운전자는 상시적으로 차량을 운전할 필요는 없지만 사고발생상황 등 비상상황에서 차량을 적절히 통제할 의무는 여전히 존재한다. 그러한 의무를 다하지 아니하여 사고가 발생하였다면 형사책임을 면할 수 없다. 이와 달리 4단계 이상의 자율주행자동차의 운전자는 운전에서 완전히 배제되고, 극히 예외적인 경우에만 자율주행자동차 운행으로 인한 형사책임을 질 것이다. 무면허운전 및 음주운전죄도 위와 같은 전제에서 판단하면 될 것으로 보인다.
마지막으로 검토될 것은 자율주행자동차가 스스로 인간과 독립하여 형사책임을 부담할 수 있는가의 문제이다. 아직 이 단계의 논의가 활발하게 이루어질 정도로 자율주행자동차의 인공지능이 발전하지는 아니한 것으로 생각된다. 그러나 미래 기술은 예측할 수 없는 속도와 방향으로 전개될 수 있으며, 어느 시점에서는 인간의 제어를 벗어난 자율주행자동차 자체를 형사처벌하여야 할 필요성이 대두될 수도 있을 것이다.
Automated vehicle refers to an self-driving automobile without regular vehicle control. Autonomy is classified in steps from 0 to 5 and drivers are not responsible for driving vehicles from the fourth step. In this paper, accountable subjects will be discussed when crimes violating the criminal law occurred in association with driving an automated vehicle. First, it is possible to think of responsibilities of automated vehicle designers and producers. As they proposed judging criteria of automated vehicle, they are generally responsible for triggering crime results from automated vehicle. If dilemma they suffer from is taken into accounts, it is quite difficult to impose unlimited criminal responsibilities on them. It is required to apply and interpret Article 20 of criminal law properly. Meanwhile, commitment responsibilities can be attributed to designers and producers if they are attributable to the errors of designing and producing automated vehicle's hardware and software and crime results were arisen from that mistake. Second, passengers in the automated vehicle can be attributed to criminal responsibilities. Drivers of the automated vehicle in the third step do not necessarily have to drive the car. Yet they are still obligated to control the car properly in case of emergency. They cannot avoid the criminal responsibility if car accident is taken a place without carrying out obligations. In contrast, drivers of the automated vehicle in the fourth step or higher are completely excluded from driving. Only in exceptional cases they may be attributed to criminal responsibilities. Unqualified driving and drunk driving can be considered on the same premise. What can be finally reviewed is whether criminal responsibilities can be imposed on automated vehicle itself independently from people. Artificial intelligence of automated vehicle is not assumed to be fully developed to discuss this step yet. However, future technologies can be developed at unpredictable speeds and directions, and at some point it will be necessary to criminalize automated vehicles themselves that are out of human control.
Automated vehicle refers to an self-driving automobile without regular vehicle control. Autonomy is classified in steps from 0 to 5 and drivers are not responsible for driving vehicles from the fourth step. In this paper, accountable subjects will be discussed when crimes violating the criminal law occurred in association with driving an automated vehicle. First, it is possible to think of responsibilities of automated vehicle designers and producers. As they proposed judging criteria of automated vehicle, they are generally responsible for triggering crime results from automated vehicle. If dilemma they suffer from is taken into accounts, it is quite difficult to impose unlimited criminal responsibilities on them. It is required to apply and interpret Article 20 of criminal law properly. Meanwhile, commitment responsibilities can be attributed to designers and producers if they are attributable to the errors of designing and producing automated vehicle's hardware and software and crime results were arisen from that mistake. Second, passengers in the automated vehicle can be attributed to criminal responsibilities. Drivers of the automated vehicle in the third step do not necessarily have to drive the car. Yet they are still obligated to control the car properly in case of emergency. They cannot avoid the criminal responsibility if car accident is taken a place without carrying out obligations. In contrast, drivers of the automated vehicle in the fourth step or higher are completely excluded from driving. Only in exceptional cases they may be attributed to criminal responsibilities. Unqualified driving and drunk driving can be considered on the same premise. What can be finally reviewed is whether criminal responsibilities can be imposed on automated vehicle itself independently from people. Artificial intelligence of automated vehicle is not assumed to be fully developed to discuss this step yet. However, future technologies can be developed at unpredictable speeds and directions, and at some point it will be necessary to criminalize automated vehicles themselves that are out of human control.
