2020년도 형사소송법 판례 회고
Review of the Criminal Procedure Precedents of the Korean Supreme Court in 2020
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this paper is to review the Criminal Procedure Precedents of the Korean Supreme Court in 2020. In chapter 2 I discuss the admissibility of Blue-House Documents which are submitted to prove the criminal liability of the chief presidential secretary during the period of the last president. These documents have been produced to appellate court by the Blue-House staffs who discovered those documents in the computer and cabinet accidentally. The Supreme Court Judgment(2020.1.30. 2018do2236 en banc) declared that the documents are admissible. But I don’t agree with the conclusion because I wonder if those documents are obtained according to the due process. The precedents relating to investigative procedure are reviewed in chapter 3. I consent to the Supreme Court’s judgment that voluntary accompaniment for the criminal investigation will be permitted solely upon voluntary intention of the suspect. And the Supreme Court declared that connection with the relevant case as one of the requirements of seizure and search is objective connection with facts of suspicion and personal connection with criminal suspect. There is an argument whether seizure without warrant at the locus of the arrest of flagrant offender is allowed. The Supreme Court agrees this topic and I also do. I examine the precedents of the evidence and appeals in the 4. chapter. The Supreme Court pronounces that any evidence obtained in violation of the due process shall not be admissible in principle, but exceptionally may be used as evidences. But I propose when serious illegality is in obtaining process of evidence, the evidence should be excluded. And I deal with the precedent as to joint penal provisions and article 312 of Criminal Procedure Act In the last chapter I review the precedents of the Supreme Court related to the defense counsel's participation right in the interrogation of the suspect, pronouncement of judgment in case of constitutional discordance adjudication of penal provision, and disposition concerning confinement(Article 417 of Criminal Procedure Act).
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to review the Criminal Procedure Precedents of the Korean Supreme Court in 2020. In chapter 2 I discuss the admissibility of Blue-House Documents which are submitted to prove the criminal liability of the chief presidential secretary during the period of the last president. These documents have been produced to appellate court by the Blue-House staffs who discovered those documents in the computer and cabinet accidentally. The Supreme Court Judgment(2020.1.30. 2018do2236 en banc) declared that the documents are admissible. But I don’t agree with the conclusion because I wonder if those documents are obtained according to the due process. The precedents relating to investigative procedure are reviewed in chapter 3. I consent to the Supreme Court’s judgment that voluntary accompaniment for the criminal investigation will be permitted solely upon voluntary intention of the suspect. And the Supreme Court declared that connection with the relevant case as one of the requirements of seizure and search is objective connection with facts of suspicion and personal connection with criminal suspect. There is an argument whether seizure without warrant at the locus of the arrest of flagrant offender is allowed. The Supreme Court agrees this topic and I also do. I examine the precedents of the evidence and appeals in the 4. chapter. The Supreme Court pronounces that any evidence obtained in violation of the due process shall not be admissible in principle, but exceptionally may be used as evidences. But I propose when serious illegality is in obtaining process of evidence, the evidence should be excluded. And I deal with the precedent as to joint penal provisions and article 312 of Criminal Procedure Act In the last chapter I review the precedents of the Supreme Court related to the defense counsel's participation right in the interrogation of the suspect, pronouncement of judgment in case of constitutional discordance adjudication of penal provision, and disposition concerning confinement(Article 417 of Criminal Procedure Act).
참고문헌 (20)
- 노명선, "형사소송법" (2009), SKKUP
- 배종대, "형사소송법" (2018), 홍문사
- 신동운, "신형사소송법" (2009), 법문사
- 백형구, "주석 형사소송법(Ⅱ)", pp.195~ (2009), 한국사법행정학회
- 이주원, "형사소송법" (2019), 박영사
- 이재상, "형사소송법" (2021), 박영사
- 이창현, "형사소송법" (2019), 도서출판 정독
- 정승환, "형사소송법" (2018), 박영사
- 강동범, "사법경찰관이 작성한 공범에 대한 피의자신문조서의 증거능력", 법학연구, 41, pp.145~166 (2014), 부설법학연구소
- 김택수, "수사상 임의동행의 허용여부와 적법성 요건", 형사판례연구, 17, pp.340~376 (2009), 한국형사판례연구회[DOI]
- 박진환, "2007년 형사소송법 개정 후 증거법 분야의 판례 동향", 형사판례연구, 25, pp.561~605 (2017), 한국형사판례연구회[DOI]
- 안성수, "위법수집 증거물의 증거능력", 형사판례연구, 15 (2007), 한국형사판례연구회
- 원혜욱, "정보저장매체의 압수・수색 - 휴대전화(스마트폰)의 압수・수색 -", 형사판례연구, 22, pp.303~335 (2014), 한국형사판례연구회[DOI]
- 이상민, "부정기형이 선고된 소년범이 단독항소 후 항소심에서 성년에 도달한 경우 항소심의 선고 상한 - 불이익변경금지 원칙의 의미를 중심으로", 형사판례연구회발표문 (2020)
- 이윤제, "위법수집증거배제법칙의 적용기준에 관한 비교법적 연구", 형사판례연구, 18, pp.412~453 (2010), 한국형사판례연구회[DOI]
- 이완규, "공범인 피의자에 대한 경찰 피의자신문조서의 증거능력", 형사법의 신동향, (18) (2009), 대검찰청
- 이완규, "압수물의 범죄사실과의 관련성과 적법합 압수물의 증거사용 범위", 형사판례연구, 23, pp.535~574 (2015), 한국형사판례연구회[DOI]
- 전승수, "디지털 증거 압수절차의 적정성 문제 - 피압수자 참여 범위 및 영장 무관 정보의 압수를 중심으로 -", 형사판례연구, 24, pp.613~643 (2016), 한국형사판례연구회[DOI]
- 전주혜, "위법수집 증거물의 증거능력", 형사판례연구, 16 (2008), 한국형사판례연구회
- 지은석, "형사소송법 제312조 제3항의 확대 적용 - 대법원 2020. 6. 11. 선고 2016도9367 판결 -", 형사법의 신동향, (69), pp.265~299 (2020), 대검찰청[DOI]
