사법개혁추진과 형사증거법의 개정

Abstract

Korea has been undergoing a series of Judicial Reforms since 2003. The Presidential Committee on the Judicial Reform was established in 2005. They have been preparing the drafts of proposed laws based on the agenda that were proposed by the Committed on Judicial Reform. The reform in the criminal justice system has been considered the most difficult part in the Judicial Reforms because there is a conflict of interests among the interested parties such as the Court, Prosecution, and Bar Association. Especially each side holds different views on the issue of the Evidence Rule of Criminal Procedure. The issue bears a significant importance because the Evidence Rule of Criminal Procedure is a critical criterion in determining the conviction or acquittal of the accused. The author has participated in the revision process of the Code of Criminal Procedure as an executive committee member of the Presidential Committee on Judicial Reform. As a member of a so-called “5 member small committee”, the author was particularly involved in the negotiation and agreement of the revised draft of Evidence Rule of Criminal Procedure. This paper is based on the author's experience during the participation in the revision process. The paper points out that the issue of exclusion of the interrogation protocol made by the prosecution was the most important issue of the revision of the Evidence Rule of Criminal Procedure. The prosecution's opposition and the negotiation process are depicted in this paper. The main goal of the revision of the Evidence Rule was to change the old system of judgement, which has been used since the Japanese occupation and mainly based on the interrogation protocol, into the new system of judgement, which is based on the matters orally discussed at the trial. However, the goal is not completely accomplished due to the prosecution's opposition. As an alternative, new mechanisms such as the witness testimony by the interrogation officer, participation of defendant attorney at the interrogation of a suspect during investigation and exclusionary rule of evidence are introduced, while the admissability for evidence of the interrogation protocol made by the prosecution is still authorized partially.