피고인과 피고인 아닌 자의 진술에 대한 증거법상의 몇 가지 문제
A Few Issues about Statements of the Defendant and Others on the Law of Evidence
0
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The eligibility of witness must be acknowledged without the need to separate the pleading of codefendants who are accomplices. It is reasonable for the scope of accomplice relationship or the substantial relevance which is basis of classifying whether or not to acknowledge the eligibility of witness to include the cases in which a possibility to pass on the criminal responsibilities among the codefendants exists objectively. A guarantee of an opportunity for the cross-examination is sufficient for the right of cross-examination as a prerequisite condition to acknowledge the admissibility of evidence of a court testimony of the codefendants who are accomplices. In regard to the codefendants who are accomplices,the admissibility of evidence should only be acknowledged when the testimony is made as a witness. Also, the protocol for a public trial which stipulates a testimony of the defendant made as a defendant of another case must be acknowledged the admissibility of evidence pursuant to the Clause 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Also, the protocol for a public trial which stipulates a testimony of a defendant in an accomplice relationship with the defendant concerned must be acknowledged its admissibility of evidence only when guaranteed a chance to cross-examine the accomplice as a witness. Furthermore, if the suspect who is an accomplice denies the contents of the interrogatory of the suspect drawned up by the police, it is reasonable to deny the admissibility of evidence regarding the defendant in the accomplice relationship.
Abstract
The eligibility of witness must be acknowledged without the need to separate the pleading of codefendants who are accomplices. It is reasonable for the scope of accomplice relationship or the substantial relevance which is basis of classifying whether or not to acknowledge the eligibility of witness to include the cases in which a possibility to pass on the criminal responsibilities among the codefendants exists objectively. A guarantee of an opportunity for the cross-examination is sufficient for the right of cross-examination as a prerequisite condition to acknowledge the admissibility of evidence of a court testimony of the codefendants who are accomplices. In regard to the codefendants who are accomplices,the admissibility of evidence should only be acknowledged when the testimony is made as a witness. Also, the protocol for a public trial which stipulates a testimony of the defendant made as a defendant of another case must be acknowledged the admissibility of evidence pursuant to the Clause 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Also, the protocol for a public trial which stipulates a testimony of a defendant in an accomplice relationship with the defendant concerned must be acknowledged its admissibility of evidence only when guaranteed a chance to cross-examine the accomplice as a witness. Furthermore, if the suspect who is an accomplice denies the contents of the interrogatory of the suspect drawned up by the police, it is reasonable to deny the admissibility of evidence regarding the defendant in the accomplice relationship.
참고문헌 (49)
- 강구진, "형사소송법원론" (1982), 학연사
- 정영석, "형사소송법(전정판)" (1996), 법문사
- 문흥수, "증거조사의 방식에 관한 문제, in 형사법에 관한 제문제(하)", 재판자료, 49, pp.16~31
- 박재완, "공동피고인의 진술의 증거능력", 판례연구, pp.6~10 (1998), 전주지방법원
- 신현주, "형사소송법(신정2판)" (2002), 박영사
- 심희기, "형사소송법의 쟁점(제3판)" (2004)
- 정웅석, "형사소송법(전정제3판)" (2009), 대명출판사
- 차용석, "형사소송법(제2판)" (2004), 세영사
- 황종국, "공동피고인의 공판정진술의 증거능력-상피고인의 반대신문권을 중심으로", 사법논집, 19 (1988), 법원행정처
- 노명선, "형사소송법" (2009), 성균관대학교출판부
- 배종대, "신형사소송법" (2008), 홍문사
- 백형구, "형사소송법강의(제8개정판)" (2001), 박영사
- 신동운, "신형사소송법(제2판)" (2009), 법문사
- 신양균, "형사소송법(제2판)" (2004)
- 임동규, "형사소송법(제6판)" (2010), 법문사
- 심희기, "형사소송법(쟁점강의)" (2009), 삼영사
- 백형구, "알기쉬운 형사소송법(제4판)" (2007), 박영사
- 신양균, "형사소송법(신판)" (2009)
- 이영란, "한국형사소송법(개정판)" (2008)
- 이재상, "신형사소송법(제2판)" (2008)
- 정웅석, "형사소송법(전정제2판)" (2008)
- 신이철, "공동피고인 진술의 증거법적(증거능력) 규제", 형사법연구, 21(2), pp.99~120 (2009), 한국형사법학회
- 김영갑, "서증의 증거능력과 증거조사방법의 비교검토-특히 공동피고인 또는 공범과 관련하여-", 형사재판의 제문제, 2, pp.431~ (1999), 형사실무연구회
- 손동권, "형사소송법", pp.462~ (2008), 세창출판사
- 송광섭, "형사소송법(신정판)", pp.280~ (2003), 유스티니아누스
- 임동규, "형사소송법(제5판)", pp.594~ (2008), 법문사
- 정웅석, "형사소송법(전정제1판)", pp.841~ (2007), 대명출판사
- 진계호, "형사소송법" (2000), 형설출판사
- 김희옥, "형사소송법의 쟁점", pp.295~ (1995), 법원사
- 이은모, "공동피고인의 자백의 증거능력", 법학논총, 23(1), pp.1~22 (2006), 법학연구소
- 김영갑, "서증의 증거능력과 증거조사방법의 비교검토-특히 공동피고인 또는 공범과 관련하여-", 형사재판의 제문제, 2 (1999)
- 이우근, "공동피고인의 자백과 보강증거, in 형사증거법(하)", pp.316~ (1984)
- 이상현, "증인적격과 증언능력, in 형사증거법(하)", pp.367~ (1984)
- 이일빈, "공동피고인의 진술, in 형사증거법(하)", pp.334~ (1984)
- 황종국, "공범의 자백", 사법논집, 26, pp.32~33
- 염정철, "형사소송법", pp.211~ (1982)
- 서일교, "형사소송법(제8개정판)", pp.179~ (1987)
- 이재상, "공동피고인의 진술", 고시연구, pp.97~ (1987)
- 이은모, "형사소송법", pp.580~594 (2010), 박영사
- 사법연수원, "형사증거법 및 사실인정론", pp.89~ (2009)
- 다른 사건의 공판조서의 증거능력, "정한중", 520~528
- 이완규, "개정 형사소송법의 쟁점", pp.120~121 (2008), 탐구사
- 정웅석, "공범인 공동피고인의 법정진술의 증거능력과 증명력", 형사판례연구, 17, pp.543~559 (2009), 한국형사판례연구회
- 이재상, "신형사소송법(제2판)", pp.563~ (2008)
- 김기두, "형사소송법(전정신판)", pp.140~ (1987), 박영사
- 임동규, "형사소송법(제6판)", pp.488~ (2009)
- 주광일, "전문법칙연구", pp.199~ (1986), 법전출판사
- 이재홍, "공범 중 어느 한 사람에 대한 사법경찰관 작성의 피의자신문조서가 다른 공범에 대한 증거로 될 수 있는 요건", 판례월보, (207), pp.45~
- 이완규, "공범인 피고인에 대한 경찰 피의자신문조서의 증거능력", 형사법의 신동향, 통권 : 18, pp.173~229 (2009), 대검찰청