다중전문증거의 증거능력에 관한 소고- 형사소송법 제310조의2의 적용과 관련하여 -

Abstract

There are some evidences which have more than two-level hearsay just like documents or third party's statements to court involving statements of others. This is referred to as the multiple hearsay evidence as distinguished from simple form of hearsay evidence. The double hearsay evidence is the most numerous among them, re-hearsay statements and double hearsay documents are typical among double hearsay evidences. In addition, it can be also hearsay that someone witnesses a document written by others and quotes them as doing script or recordings. The article 310 section 2 in the criminal procedure code regulates “The statements at preparation of a trial or a trial date which instead of statements of others or documents do not have admissibility of evidence except for what stipulated at the article 311 to 316” under the title “hearsay evidence and the limitation of admissibility of evidence”. Also, the article 311 to 316 absolutely do not regulate about the multiple hearsay evidence in regulating exception which can especially have the admissibility of evidence in spite of hearsay evidence. We should multiply apply the exceptions to the hearsay rule to each hearsay step for authorizing the admissibility of evidence of multiple hearsay evidence. Acceptance or rejection about a multiple application depends on construction of the article 310-2. I studied on the admissibility of multiple hearsay evidences involved re-hearsay statements and double hearsay documents, and suggest standard and logical basis of the examining about the admissibility of those evidences. The technological development including telecommunications makes us get more opportunities to encounter a intention expression of others through a variety of media. Also, it gives us more opportunities to deliver the expression to others again. In the process, it is expected that more opportunities that the multiple hearsay evidence overlapping hearsay steps emerges and appears to court. So I think that we must study about the multiple hearsay evidence deeply and systematically. To date, we focus only on hearsay statements and documents about hearsay evidence, and we examine them in the same level. But, as mentioned above, there is a distinct difference between the hearsay statements and documentsin the aspect of ‘hearsay’, and various form of hearsay evidence can be existed apart from the tow. This being so, I think that this point must be studied with the study on multiple hearsay evidence.