한국의 진술분석 활용현황: 서유럽 국가와의 비교
The Utilization of Statement Analysis in Korea: A Comparison with the Western Europe Countries
0
조회
0
다운로드
10
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
본 연구에서는 진술분석의 한국 내 발전 방안을 마련하기 위해 범죄사건 해결에 진술분석을 활발하게 활용하고 있는 독일, 스웨덴, 스위스의 서유럽 국가와 한국의 진술분석 진행 및 활용 현황을 비교하였다. 서유럽 국가들에서 진술분석은 법원이 보유하고 있는 전문가 명단의 전문가들에게 의뢰되며, 진술분석에는 주로 진술타당도평가(Statement Validity Analysis: SVA) 절차가 활용되고 있었다. 한국의 경우 수사의 모든 단계에서 진술분석이 의뢰될 수 있다는 것이 가장 큰 특징이었다. 독일과 스웨덴에서는 진술분석에 대한 전문가의 의견서가 법정에서 증거능력을 인정받는 반면, 스위스와 한국에서는 진술분석 결과가 수사 및 재판 절차에서 활용되고는 있었지만 증거능력을 인정받지는 못하고 있었다. 또한 독일과 스위스는 판례를 통해 재판에서 전문가의 의견이 증거로 제시될 경우 그 의견서가 갖추어야 하는 최소한의 요건을 제시하고 있었다. 스웨덴에서는 전문가 의견서의 질을 평가하기 위해 구조화된 전문가 증언의 품질 평가 도구(Structured Quality assessment of eXpert witness testimony: SQX-12)가 개발되어 있었다. 이러한 비교 결과를 바탕으로 본 연구에서는 한국 내 진술분석의 발전을 위해 네 가지 개선 방안을 제안하였으며, 본 연구의 제안 내용은 향후 정책마련을 위한 중요한 정보로 고려되어야 할 것이다.
Abstract
This study compared the procedure of statement analysis and the present state of its utilization in Korea with those in three Western Europe countries, Germany, Sweden, and Swiss. In order to investigate the specific procedure of statement analysis and the different state of the utilization in each country, literature was reviewed and in-depth interview was conducted with each country’s experts who have been currently working in both practical/academic field of statement analysis. Generally, in the Western Europe countries, the courts have expert lists and the experts would be requested to conduct statement analysis of a witness by the court or a party of the trial. In Korea, statement analysis could be conducted in any stage of criminal procedure. In Germany and Sweden, an expert’s testimony based on his/her statement analysis for a witness is admissible to the courts, which is the most distinctive feature in comparison to the statement analysis expert’s testimony in Swiss and Korea. An expert’s opinion is regarded as only one piece of information for criminal investigation or trial. German and Swiss courts have the minimum standards for admissible expert’s report. In Sweden, there is a scientific assessment tool, Structured Quality assessment of eXpert witness testimony (SQX-12) that would allow triers of fact to assess the quality of expert report, while no such instrument or standard have developed in Korea. On the basis of the comparison, the four ways to improve the procedural validity and the utilization of statement analysis in Korea were suggested. As these suggestions would effectively strengthen the procedural validity of statement analysis and expand the utilizability of its result in Korea, it ought to be considered as significant information in the future policy making.
참고문헌 (22)
- 박상기, "성범죄 피해아동의 진술의 신빙성 판단 기준 - 독일법원판결을 중심으로 -", 피해자학연구, 24(1), pp.197~219 (2016), 한국피해자학회
- 박종선, "「진술분석」 10년의 성과와 개선방향 - 대검예규 ‘진술분석 규정’을 중심으로 -", 홍익법학, 17(2), pp.257~276 (2016), 법학연구소[DOI]
- Arntzen, F, "Psychologie der Zeugenaussage" (1970), Hogrefe
- Arntzen, F, "Psychologie der Zeugenaussage:Systematik der Glaubwürdigkeitsmerkmale" (1983), C. H. Beck
- "BGer, Urteil v. 20.12.2001, 6P.36", 2001, E. 2 und 3, 2001
- , 1999
- "Doctor", University of Uppsala, 1991
- Gumpert, C, "Handbook of Psychology in Legal Contexts", pp.515~531 (2003), Wiley
- Gumpert, C. H, "The quality of written expert testimony in alleged child sexual abuse : An empirical study. Psychology", Crime and Law, 8(1), pp.77~92 (2002)
- Köhnken, G, "The child witness: Do the courts abuse children? (Issues in Criminological and Legal Psychology, no. 13)", pp.37~45 (1988), British Psychological Society
- Littmann. E, "Zu einigen Kriterien und Ergebnissen forensischpsychologischer Glaubwurdigkeitsbegutachtung von sexuell missbrauchten Kindern und Jugendlichen", Forensia, 4, pp.55~72 (1983)
- Parker, A. D, "Detection of deception : Statement Validity Analysis as a means of determining truthfulness or falsity of rape allegations", Legal and Criminological Psychology, 5(2), pp.237~259 (2000)
- Bevisprövning vid Sexualbrott. (Sifting of Evidence in Sexual Abuse Cases), "Sutorius H", Nordstedts juridik, ~ (2003)
- Schelin, L, (2007), Nordstedts juridik
- Assessing reliability by analyzing the verbal content: The case of Sweden, "Strömwall, L. A", Forensic psychology in context: Nordic and international approaches, 264~280 (2010)
- Trankell, A, "Reliability of evidenceStockholm" (1972), Beckmans
- "U.a. BGE 128 I 81, 82 ff", ~
- Undeutsch, U, "Handbuch der Psychologie Vol. 11: Forensische Psychologie", pp.26~181 (1967), Hogrefe
- Undeutsch, U, "Reconstructing the past:The role of psychologists in criminal trials", pp.27~56 (1982), Kluwer
- Vrij, A, "Criteria-Based Content Analysis: A qualitative review of the first 37 studies", Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, pp.3~41 (2005)
- Vrij, A, "Detecting lies and deceit : Pitfalls and opportunities" (2008), John Wiley &Sons
- Willén, R. M, "Offenders' lies and truths: an evaluation of the Supreme Court of Sweden's criteria for credibility assessment", Psychology, Crime & Law, 18(8), pp.745~758 (2012)