자유심증주의의 범위와 한계

Abstract

The cause of the crime should be judged synthetically through a subjective evaluation of the motive of the crime as well as an objective evaluation based on the laws of science. In order to make a guilty judgment based on indirect evidence(circumstantial evidence), the evidence must be strictly related to the facts that require proof(factum probandum), and it should be a practical matter to rule out the rational hypothesis that the accused is not guilty. However, it can not be said that the demand for such relevance and substantivity should exclude all irrational hypotheses on the accused. The legal maxim ‘in dubio pro reo’ serves as the lighthouse of the night sea, which leads the judgment to the right destination, but the lighthouse is not the destination of the ship named ‘free evaluation of evidence’. The important thing is to take the lighthouse warning and head for the right destination. From this perspective, it will be necessary to appreciate the intent of Supreme Court’s decision, which states that “The recognition of guilt in a criminal trial shall be based on the proof beyond reasonable doubt. It does not, however, require a degree to exclude all possible doubts that are not rational. It is not permissible to exclude evidence with probative power based on suspicion without reasonable grounds because it is beyond the limitations of the Principle of Free Evaluation of Evidence.”