시민로스쿨을 통한 배심원 교육의 필요성에 관한 연구

Abstract

Citizen’s legal participation system in trial is one where national people participate as jury and judge guilty or not and submit opinion on sentence through discussion and verdict independently from professional judge. It is certain that the system secures democratic justification. But verdict of jury has only advisory effect so that this could not actually bind professional judge. The reasons to grant such advisory effect are as follows. First, this is because there is a regulation in Article 27 (1) that reads “All citizens shall have the right to trial according to law by judges qualified and appointed under the Constitution and Act.” That is, judges qualified and appointed under the Constitution and Act mean professional judge not jury so that verdict of a jury does not have binding force. Second, as a jury lacks legal knowledge in theory and practical use than professional judge, there is phenomenon that judgment of jury cannot be trusted. Actually, Appeal rate by the prosecutor is some 34% higher in results of Citizen’s legal participation system in trial than the first general trial, which can be interpreted that considerable part of results of Citizen’s legal participation system in trial cannot be accepted. To improve such problem, it is suggested that after educating jury and candidates for jury for some four years, qualified persons out of them are selected as a jury. Educational content are decided by legal experts in various fields, educational experts etc. through a meeting with them. Based on this, educational manual is written out and then, theoretical classes such as basic criminal law, legal terms etc. are proceeded. Actual practice is added through mock trial. Accordingly, both theory and practice can be equipped so qualitative improvement for a jury should be encouraged which in turn, difficult and complicated suit can be proceeded without problem. Through this, trial period by jury which is the largest difficulty for a jury can be shortened most. And improvement of understanding on legal terms can make a jury fully understand about trial. As a result, professional judge can be bound to content of verdict through discussion. Based on this, such recognition that a jury is a foil can be prevented and they can join Citizen’s legal participation system in trial with pride and self-esteem. Based on this, such recognition that a jury is a foil can be prevented and they can join Citizen’s legal participation system in trial with pride and self-esteem.