국민참여재판의 활성화 방안에 관한 연구
A Study on methods for Activation of jury trial system in Korea
0
조회
0
다운로드
28
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The chronic diseases in korean judiciary, 'the Privileges of Former Post'and 'All mighty is the dollar', lose strength in the very People's Participatory Trial. The Participatory Trial in Korea have been enforced 4 years. It has the positive standpoints that offer the place of democracy education, get back the public confidence in the judiciary and strengthen the democratic legitimacy of the judiciary. But, because of low-end receipt ratio and high withdrawal and exclusion ratio, it is not enough to say that the Participatory Trial has been activated and has taken root in our judiciary system. Especially, in comparison with the jury system in America which has been advanced actively, the jury trial system in Korea is not regarded as the stage of activation. This is the meaning we have to activate the new system the more. Therefore, it is necessary to focus the direction of the new system on activation. First of all, we should examine the problems that obstruct the activation of the Participatory Trial and find out the plan of improvement. The problems that obstruct the activation of the Participatory Trial ; A high evasion ratio and a high withdrawal ratio of defendant, the severe application of the causes of exclusion to the Participatory Trial and the rigorous meddling of the court in a jury trial, and the excessive appeal of the prosecution that objects to the finding of the Participatory Trial. Tosolve these problems, it is required the conversion of defendant's understanding that selecting a jury trial is favorable to him. With full legal advice, it is needed to prepare the surrounding to select. And it is necessary of the legislation to concretize the causes of exclusion that were inclusive and obscure. The more participation of people be demanded in improvement of the system and the Participatory Trial take root in our culture. When jourors unanimously give the non-guilty verdict,the appeal of the prosecution should not be admitted.
Abstract
The chronic diseases in korean judiciary, 'the Privileges of Former Post'and 'All mighty is the dollar', lose strength in the very People's Participatory Trial. The Participatory Trial in Korea have been enforced 4 years. It has the positive standpoints that offer the place of democracy education, get back the public confidence in the judiciary and strengthen the democratic legitimacy of the judiciary. But, because of low-end receipt ratio and high withdrawal and exclusion ratio, it is not enough to say that the Participatory Trial has been activated and has taken root in our judiciary system. Especially, in comparison with the jury system in America which has been advanced actively, the jury trial system in Korea is not regarded as the stage of activation. This is the meaning we have to activate the new system the more. Therefore, it is necessary to focus the direction of the new system on activation. First of all, we should examine the problems that obstruct the activation of the Participatory Trial and find out the plan of improvement. The problems that obstruct the activation of the Participatory Trial ; A high evasion ratio and a high withdrawal ratio of defendant, the severe application of the causes of exclusion to the Participatory Trial and the rigorous meddling of the court in a jury trial, and the excessive appeal of the prosecution that objects to the finding of the Participatory Trial. Tosolve these problems, it is required the conversion of defendant's understanding that selecting a jury trial is favorable to him. With full legal advice, it is needed to prepare the surrounding to select. And it is necessary of the legislation to concretize the causes of exclusion that were inclusive and obscure. The more participation of people be demanded in improvement of the system and the Participatory Trial take root in our culture. When jourors unanimously give the non-guilty verdict,the appeal of the prosecution should not be admitted.
참고문헌 (24)
- 김상준, "미국 배심재판 제도의 연구" (2003), 이화여자대학교 출판부
- 2009), "국민참여재판 성과 분석(2008", pp.2010, 법원행정처
- 2010년), "국민참여재판 성과 분석(2008년", pp.2011, 법원행정처
- 안경환, "배심제와 시민의 사법참여" (2005), 집문당
- 최대권, "국민의 사법참여 - 무엇이 문제인가", 국민의 사법참여 공청회 (2004)
- 권영설, "배심제·참심제의 도입논의와 그 헌법적합성의 문제", 법과사회, 28(26), pp.97~121 (2004), 법과사회이론학회
- 김대성, "국민이 참여하는 형사재판제도의 도입과 발전방안에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2007
- 김병수, "국민참여재판의 중간평가", 형사정책연구, 21(3)통권 : 83, pp.311~348 (2010), 한국형사정책연구원
- 김태규, "국민참여재판의 개선방안에 대한 연구", 형사정책연구, 19(4)통권 : 76, pp.127~156 (2008), 한국형사정책연구원
- 김태명, "국민참여재판제도의 개선과제", 인권과 정의, (379), pp.27~43 (2008), 대한변호사협회
- 박근용, "국민참여재판, 사법 민주주의의 새 장을 열다", 시민과 세계, (13) (2008), 참여연대 참여사회연구소
- 송기춘, "참심제 도입 여부와 실시에 관한 헌법학적 논의", 법과사회, (28), pp.179~210 (2005), 법과사회이론학회
- 심회기, "시민의 관점에서 본 국민참여재판의 현황과 전망", 한국사회학회 사회학대회 논문집 (2009), 한국사회학회
- 윤영철, "사법개혁과 배심제", 민주법학, (29), pp.97~128 (2005), 민주주의법학연구회
- 이금옥, "국민참여재판의 시행상의 문제점과 개선방안", 공법학연구, 9(4), pp.135~160 (2008), 한국비교공법학회
- 이완규, "국민참여재판제도 정착 방안", 지정토론, 2008, pp.통권 : 106, ~[DOI]
- 이은모, "현행 국민참여재판제도의 내용과 문제점 －일본의 재판원제도와의 비교를 중심으로－", 법학논총, 26(1), pp.405~426 (2009), 법학연구소
- 정진연, "국민참여재판과 형사재판의 소송주체의 역할 비교", 법학논총, 19, pp.133~160 (2008), 법학연구소
- 한상훈, "국민참여재판제도의 정착방안", 저스티스, (106)통권 : 106, pp.483~534 (2008), 한국법학원
- 한인섭, "법조비리-문제와 대안", 서울대학교 법학, 39(1) (1998)
- 황성기, "한국에서의 참심제와 배심제의 헌법적합성", 법과사회, (26), pp.123~143 (2004), 법과사회이론학회
- Practices, policies and procedures that influence juror satsfaction in Australia, "Jane Goodman-Delahunty", Australian Institute of Criminology, ~ (2008)
- 白木 功, "裁判員裁判1년の課題と展望-檢察官の立場から", 刑事法ジャーナ ル, (24) (2010)
- 戶刈左近, "裁判員裁判の實施狀況", 刑事法ジャーナル, (24) (2010)