검사의 신문과정상 참여수사관의 역할과 한계
The Role and the Limit of Participation of the Attending Officer in the Public Attorney's Interrogation
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In the Prosecution Service Act, it is prescribed that the attending officer of the public attorney has the role of the document officer and the helping agency for the public attorney. As the helping officer, he participate in the interrogation of the public attorney and put questions to the suspect or witness and other persons. As for the questioning of the attending officer, it was judged by the Court in this case that it is allowed, but has limitations. First, the public attorney should in person put questions about the important matters and after it, the attending officer can put questions about details or ambiguous answers. Second, during the question of the attending officer, the public attorney should be present the interrogating place with the attending officer and preside the process. There are some people who insist that the attending officer's questioning should be prohibited and the public attorney should put all questions in person. But this opinion does not accord with the current law. On enacting the Prosecution service Act, the legislature made the choice with the provision §46 ① 1. that allows the attending officer to do the works relating to the investigation which the public attorney orders. It is thought that this choice would be made because of the insufficient numbers of the public attorney and the necessity of the sharing the burden of works. Considering the overweighting burden of works for the public attorney, the Court's interpretation could be said to be right to the present. But in practice, if we can say the public attorney's interrogation, the role of the attending officer should be limited within the supplement of the factual work.
Abstract
In the Prosecution Service Act, it is prescribed that the attending officer of the public attorney has the role of the document officer and the helping agency for the public attorney. As the helping officer, he participate in the interrogation of the public attorney and put questions to the suspect or witness and other persons. As for the questioning of the attending officer, it was judged by the Court in this case that it is allowed, but has limitations. First, the public attorney should in person put questions about the important matters and after it, the attending officer can put questions about details or ambiguous answers. Second, during the question of the attending officer, the public attorney should be present the interrogating place with the attending officer and preside the process. There are some people who insist that the attending officer's questioning should be prohibited and the public attorney should put all questions in person. But this opinion does not accord with the current law. On enacting the Prosecution service Act, the legislature made the choice with the provision §46 ① 1. that allows the attending officer to do the works relating to the investigation which the public attorney orders. It is thought that this choice would be made because of the insufficient numbers of the public attorney and the necessity of the sharing the burden of works. Considering the overweighting burden of works for the public attorney, the Court's interpretation could be said to be right to the present. But in practice, if we can say the public attorney's interrogation, the role of the attending officer should be limited within the supplement of the factual work.
참고문헌 (12)
- 대검찰청, "한국 검찰사" (1976)
- 문준영, "법원과 검찰의 탄생: 사법의 역사로 읽는 대한민국" (2010), 역사비평사
- 양동철, "형사소송법판례백선(제2판)" (2012), 홍문사
- 이완규, "형사소송법특강" (2006), 법문사
- 이재상, "신형사소송법" (2008), 박영사
- 검사실 참여수사관의 역할 활성화 방안 연구, "정진섭", 대검찰청, ~ (2009)
- 玉名友彦, "국역 조선형사령석의" (2005), 법원도서관
- Jerouschek, "Die Herausbildung des peinlichen Inquisitionsprozesses im Spätmittelalter und in der frühen Neuzeit", ZStW, 104 (1992)
- Kleinecht, "StPO" (2004), C.H.Beck
- Oehler, "Zur Entstehung des strafrechtlichen Inquisitionsprozesses" (1986), Gedächtnisschrift für Hilde Kaufmann
- Sättler, "Die Entwicklung der französischen Staatsanwaltschaft", pp.1956
- Schimidt, "Einführung in die Geschichte der Deutschen Strafrechtspflege" (1995), Vandenhoeck & Rupprecht
