The Study of Acceptability of Search and Confiscation for another Digital EVIDENCE
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The issue with digital evidence has been discussed continuously in Korea because its unique characteristics such as independence, invisibility, mixture. In this sense, question is that whether or not the principles of traditional Criminal Procedure Act can make application to digital evidence. This thesis focus on investigative agency that cope with seizing digital information that is not related to crime. When investigative agency seize digital information, most of them are not original evidence but copied evidence according to article 106 of Criminal Procedure Act. Thus, this study examines whether or not the investigative agency should get search and confiscation regarding another digital evidence despite having copied image evidence. This thesis points out that precedent cases that judge investigative agency should get another search and confiscation in order to continue investigation should be criticized because it can hinder dynamics of investigation. However, in the case of independent search and confiscation, abuse of authority can concern. So, the thesis insists jurisdiction should adopt limited search and confiscation against dangerous power which harm national security. The digital evidence holds unique features like media independence, information with no shape, easy replication, vulnerability, massiveness and network relevance but most regulations in the current criminal evidence act do not presume such digital evidence, creating a vacuum in the legal regulations. The relevant regulations in the current criminal evidence act should be interpreted by considering the feature of the digital evidence. However, the interpretation has limitations in filling the vacuum in the criminal act with established principles in prohibiting the guessing and implementing strict interpretation. Therefore, the criminal evidence act should be amended to cover digital evidence. All the evidence requires sincerity but digital evidence additionally requires unique prerequisites like the identity with the original version, integrity and reliability. Judicial precedents on how to prove such prerequisites have been gradually accumulated but in the long term, specific rules should be clearly developed for law enforcement agencies to follow, and the customs or legislation amendment is required that can accept or guess that the prerequisites above are satisfied if the rules are proven to be observed.
Abstract
The issue with digital evidence has been discussed continuously in Korea because its unique characteristics such as independence, invisibility, mixture. In this sense, question is that whether or not the principles of traditional Criminal Procedure Act can make application to digital evidence. This thesis focus on investigative agency that cope with seizing digital information that is not related to crime. When investigative agency seize digital information, most of them are not original evidence but copied evidence according to article 106 of Criminal Procedure Act. Thus, this study examines whether or not the investigative agency should get search and confiscation regarding another digital evidence despite having copied image evidence. This thesis points out that precedent cases that judge investigative agency should get another search and confiscation in order to continue investigation should be criticized because it can hinder dynamics of investigation. However, in the case of independent search and confiscation, abuse of authority can concern. So, the thesis insists jurisdiction should adopt limited search and confiscation against dangerous power which harm national security. The digital evidence holds unique features like media independence, information with no shape, easy replication, vulnerability, massiveness and network relevance but most regulations in the current criminal evidence act do not presume such digital evidence, creating a vacuum in the legal regulations. The relevant regulations in the current criminal evidence act should be interpreted by considering the feature of the digital evidence. However, the interpretation has limitations in filling the vacuum in the criminal act with established principles in prohibiting the guessing and implementing strict interpretation. Therefore, the criminal evidence act should be amended to cover digital evidence. All the evidence requires sincerity but digital evidence additionally requires unique prerequisites like the identity with the original version, integrity and reliability. Judicial precedents on how to prove such prerequisites have been gradually accumulated but in the long term, specific rules should be clearly developed for law enforcement agencies to follow, and the customs or legislation amendment is required that can accept or guess that the prerequisites above are satisfied if the rules are proven to be observed.
참고문헌 (12)
- Jung DH, "The Question of Rele-vancy in Searches and Seizures of Digital Evi-dence", Korean Criminological Review, 26(2), pp.95~130 (2015)
- Park MW, "A Study on the Due Process of Law in Search and Seizure of Digital Evi-dence", Doctoral, pp.2016
- An SS, "Criminal Procedure Law" (2010), Pakyoungsa
- 손동권, "새로이 입법화된 디지털 증거의 압수·수색제도에 관한 연구 - 특히 추가적 보완입법의 문제 -", 형사정책, 23(2), pp.325~349 (2011), 한국형사정책학회[DOI]
- Kim ES, "A Study on the Scope and Criteria of Exclusionary Rule of Illegally Collected Evi-dence for Seized Articles", Master's, pp.2014
- Roh MS, "Criminal Procedure Law" (2015), SKKUP
- Lee EM, "Criminal Procedure Law" (2015), Pakyoungsa
- 조국, "압수·수색의 합법성 기준 재검토", 비교형사법연구, 5(2-1), pp.29~782 (2003), 한국비교형사법학회
- 박혁수, "디지털 정보 압수·수색의 실무상 쟁점", 형사법의 신동향, (44), pp.76~113 (2014), 대검찰청[DOI]
- Kim SY, "Vorläufige Beschlagnhame eines Zufallsfundes im Bezug Auf Die El-ektronischen Informationen", New Trend in Criminal Law, 49, pp.106~158 (2015)
- "Supreme Courten Banc Decision", ~ (2010)
