사법신뢰형성구조와 재판의 공개
Public Trust Building Structure of the Judiciary and Access to Justice
0
조회
0
다운로드
20
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
국민의 신뢰는 사법부의 존립기반이다. 신뢰는 윤리성과 헌신에 대한 기대로서의 신용과 기능수행능력에 대한 기대로서의 신임의 두 가지를 요소로 한다. 신뢰의 형성을 단선구조로 파악하면 ‘객관적 실체→지각→인식→신뢰’의 구조로 이루어진다고 할 수 있다. 재판당사자의 기본권, 공개사법이라는 제도적 보장, 일반국민의 알권리라는 3각 구도의 배경 위에서 각국은 재판의 공개를 추구하여 왔는데, 그 저변에는 국민의 신뢰를 확보하고자 하는 목적이 깔려 있다. 우리나라가 2000년을 전후한 기간 신뢰 확보를 위한 노력으로 추구한 여러 소송법적 제도개혁에는 재판공개의 추구라는 공통점을 발견할 수 있는데, 이는 신뢰형성의 단선구조를 은연중 염두에 둔 것이라 하겠다. 그러나 그럼에도 불구하고 우리나라 사법부가 국민의 신뢰를 받고 있다고 하기 어렵고 오히려 불신의 대상이 되고 있는 것이 현실이다. 신뢰형성의 단선구조는 이를 설명하기 어렵다. 지각과 인식을 통하여 취득하는 정보의 양뿐만 아니라 그 종류와 성격, 정보의 왜곡현상, 장기신뢰와 단기신뢰 등 여러 요소를 함께 고려하여야 비로소 신뢰형성에 대한 올바른 파악이 가능하다. 이 글은 이를 토대로 신뢰형성의 복합구조를 제시하였다. 이에 의할 때, 정보의 통제는 단기적으로는 신뢰는 증가시키지만 장기적으로는 오히려 신뢰를 감쇄시킨다. 결국 신뢰형성을 위해서는 정보의 최대공개가 요구된다. 그런데 디지털기반의 현대정보사회는 재판의 공개에 대하여 정보주체의 보호라는 묵과할 수 없는 과제를 던져준다. 그럼에도 불구하고 최대공개의 원칙은 유지되어야 하며, 다만 그 현대적 변용을 통하여 과제를 해결하여야 한다. 대상정보의 성질에 따른 일률적 결정이 아니라 공개범위의 질적인 제한과 단계적 차등공개를 함께 고려하는 것이 그 변용의 구체적인 핵심열쇠가 될 것이다.
Abstract
No Judiciary can stand still without public trust. Trust in a broad sense consists of trust in a narrow meaning as ‘an expectation of ethics and commitment’ and confidence as ‘an expectation of the ability’. It is crucial to portray the structure how a judiciary gets the public trust. A simple understanding can draw it as ‘Real Object → Perception → Cognition → Trust’, which can be named as a simple structure of public trust building. Many countries pursue open justice and protect the right of access to the justice. This is based on the constitutional right to public trials of the parties, guarantee of an institution, and the constitutional right to know of the public. All of these aim to strive to acquire public trust. Korea has witnessed several reforms in civil and criminal procedure, which can be characterized by making efforts toward building an open judiciary, expecting to earn public trust. According to the simple structure theory, the Korean Judiciary should have gotten more trust from the public. However, in reality it has less trust, or rather, more mistrust than any prior periods of history. Trust building has complex structure, which consists of not only the quantity of the information but also the quality and species therof, distortion of information, and short/long term trust. This article presents a hypothetical model of trust building on the basis of compound structure. This model will explain why open justice results in decrease of trust at one time and increase in another. In any case, for long term trust, it is essential to have open justice. Open presumption has confronted a big problem in the Internet age. Privacy issue on the Internet is totally different from that on papers. Traditional standards of disclosure are no longer valid. The principle of maximum disclosure and open presumption needs to be adjusted to the modern context, the limit of access to judicial information needs to be under qualitative control rather than quantitative control, and differential standards should decide the scope of disclosure, even if they might have some equality problems.
참고문헌 (117)
- 공정식, "Best of Best 심리학" (2010), 가람북스
- 인터넷상에서 사회적 의사소통 양식과 합의 형성, "김은미", 정보통신정책연구원, ~ (2004)
- 김은미, "SNS 혁명의 신화와 실제 (‘토크, 플레이, 러브’의 진화)" (2011), 나남
- 김학주, "논어" (1985), 서울대학교출판부
- 형사소송법 제․개정 자료집(상), "신양균", 한국형사정책연구원, ~ (2009)
- 이상원, "판결과 기록의 공개 그리고 투명한 사법" (2012), 경인문화사
- 이정모, "인지과학" (2008), 성균관대학교 출판부
- 이준웅, "인터넷 게시판 토론과 정치 토론 효능감", 한국언론학보, 50(3), pp.393~423 (2006), 한국언론학회
- 정원식, "인간의 인지" (2010), 교육과학사
- 차정인, "공판중심주의 실현방안 연구 : 개정 형사소송법상 공판절차와 전문법칙 규정의 해석론과 입법론", 박사, pp.2009
- 山岸俊男, "신뢰의 구조" (2001), 교육과학사
- Rovighi, Sofia Vanni, "인식론의 역사" (2004), 가톨릭대학교출판부
- 법원행정처, "구술심리 운영실무" (2006)
- 법원행정처, "국민참여재판의 이해" (2007)
- 법원행정처, "사법연감 (1996-2002)", ~ (2002)
- 법원행정처, "사법운영의 현황과 과제" (2006)
- 법원행정처, "새로운 형사재판 실무" (2002)
- 법원행정처, "새로운 형사재판 운영방식" (2003)
- 집중심리방식 시범실시결과보고서, "법원행정처", ~ (1996)
- 법원행정처, "형사소송규칙해설(전정증보판)", ~ (1997)
- 서울지방법원, "새로운 민사사건관리방식 운영백서" (2002)
- 2010 연간보고서, "양형위원회", ~ (2011)
- 양형위원회, "2012 양형기준", ~ (2012)
- 한국인의 가치관 여론조사 결과, "특임장관실", ~ (2011)
- 김배원, "‘재판기록 및 재판정보의 공개방안’에 대한 검토", 사법 선진화를 위한 개혁:사법제도개혁추진위원회 자료집, 13 (2009), 사법제도개혁추진위원회
- 김현석, "공판중심주의 실현을 위한 법정심리절차", 사법, 1(3), pp.71~159 (2008), 사법발전재단
- 박광민, "범죄피해자의 양형절차에의 참가", 형사법연구, 21(4), pp.175~194 (2009), 한국형사법학회
- 박광섭, "개정 형사소송법상 피해자보호에 관한 규정의 평가와 향후 입법과제", 법조, 57(3), pp.88~113 (2008), 법조협회
- 신동운, "제정형사소송법의 성립경위", 형사법연구, (22), pp.159~221 (2004), 한국형사법학회
- 하태훈, "형사재판편, In 사법부의 어제와 오늘 그리고 내일(상)" (2008), 사법발전재단
- 함인선, "‘잊혀질 권리’에 관한 고찰 - EU 개인정보보호법안과 우리나라 ｢개인정보 보호법｣의 비교를 중심으로 -", 인권과 정의, (427), pp.51~67 (2012), 대한변호사협회[DOI]
- 宮澤俊義, "全訂日本國憲法" (1978), 日本評論社
- 福島至, "コメンタール 刑事確定訴訟記錄法" (1999), 現代人文社
- 杉原泰雄, "憲法 II 統治の機構" (1989), 有斐閣
- 松井茂記, "マス․メディア法入門 (第二版)" (1998), 日本評論社
- 松井茂記, "裁判を受ける權利" (1993), 日本評論社
- 押切謙德, "注釋 刑事確定訴訟記錄法" (1988), ぎょうせい
- 伊藤榮樹, "注釋 刑事訴訟法(新版) 第一卷" (1996), 立花書房
- 田宮 裕, "注釋 刑事訴訟法" (1980), 有斐閣
- 佐藤幸治, "要說 コメンタール 日本國憲法" (1991)
- 樋口陽一, "注釋 日本國憲法 (下)" (1988), 靑林書院
- 內野正幸, "裁判を受ける權利と裁判公開原則", 法律時報, 68(1), pp.64~ (1994), 日本評論社
- 山名學, "紀錄の開示, In 講座 實務家事審判法" (1989)
- 松原光宏, "裁判公開と犯罪被害者の保護", ジュリスト 別冊 187号 : 憲法判例百選 II, 426~427 (2007)
- 松井茂記, "裁判の公開と ｢秘密｣の保護 (三․完)", 民商法雜誌, 106(6), pp.735~772 (1992)
- 浦部法穗, "訴訟記錄の公開と憲法, In コメンタール 刑事確定訴訟記錄法" (1999), 現代人文社
- Barua, Vidisha, "Accountability and Transparency of the Federal Judiciary", Crim. Law Bulletin, 45(4) (2009)
- Brown, Eileen, "Working the Crowd: Social Media Marketing for Business" (2010), BCS
- Burbank, Stephen B., "Reconsidering Judicial Independence, In Judicial Independence at the Crossroads: An Interdisciplinary Approach" (2002)
- Caldeira, Gregory A., "The Etiology of Public Support for the Supreme Court", American Journal of Political Science, 36 (1992)
- Campbell, Enid Mona, "The Australian Judiciary" (2001), Cambridge University Press
- "An In-Depth Look inside the Twitter World" (2009)[URL]
- Citrin, Jack, "The Political Relevance of Trust in Government", The American Political Science Review, 68(3) (1974)
- Citrin, Jack, "Trust in Government, In Measures of Political Attitudes" (1999)
- Citron, Danielle, "Sometimes It Really Is Big Brother", 2, 10 BLOGSOD (Westlaw자료), ~
- Cohen, Noam, "Courts Turn to Wikipedia, but Selectively", The New York Times, ~ (2007)
- Dougherty, George W., "Evaluating Performance in State Judicial Institutions: Trust and Confidence in the Georgia Judiciary", State and Local Government Review, 38(36) (2006)
- Dulude, Nicole J., "Unlocking America’s Courthouse Doors: Restoring a Presumption of Frist Amendment Access as a Means of Reviving Public Faith in the Judiciary", Roger Williams U. L. Rev, 11 (2005)
- Eltis, Karen, "The Judicial System in the Digital Age: Revisiting the Relationship between Privacy and Accessibility in the Cyber Context", McGill LJ, 56(2) (2011)
- Fagan, R. W., "Public Support for the Courts: An Examination of Alternative explanations", Journal of Criminal Justice, 9 (1981)
- Freedman, Warren, "Press and Media to the Criminal Courtroom" (1988)
- Ginsberg, Wendy R., "Access to Government Information in the United States", CRS Report for Congress (2009)
- Henderson, Keith, "Judicial Transparency Checklist", IFES 2003 (2003)
- Access to Information and Transparency in the Judiciary, "Herrero, Ālvaro", World Bank Institute, ~ (2010)
- Access, Fairness, and Trust in the North Dakota Court System, "Holewa, Sally A.", Institute for Court Management Court Executive Development Program Phase III Project, ~ (2007)
- Citizen Evaluation of the Louisiana Courts, "Howell, Susan E.", ~ (1998)
- Jones, Karen, "Symposium on Trust: Trust as an Affective Attitude", Ethics, 107 (1996)
- Kritzer, Herbert M., "Familiarity Breeds Respect: How Wisconsin Citizens View Their Courts", Judicature, 82 (1998)
- Lee, Sang Won, "Trust and Confidence in the Judiciary", UT Soft Law Review (2012)
- Lehne, R., "The Impact of Judicial Activism on Public Opinion", American Journal of Political Science, 22 (1978)
- Levi, Margaret, "Political Trust and Trustworthiness", Annual Review of Political Science, 3 (2000)
- Levy, Ron, "Judicial Selection: Trust and Reform", U.B.C. L. Rev., 40 (2007)
- Lind, E. A., "The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice" (1988)
- Lind, E. A., "Individual and Corporate Dispute Resolution: Using Procedural Fairness as a Decision Heuristic", Administrative Science Quarterly, 38 (1993)
- Mackaay, Ejan, "What’s so Special About Cyberspace—Reflections on Elkin-Koren and Salzberg", Lex Electronica, 10(3) (2006)
- Makin, Kirk, "Online Tribunal Evidence Leaves Citizens’ Data open to Abuse", The Globe and Mail, A5~ (2008)
- Mason, A.T., "Harlan Fiske Stone: Pillar of the Law" (1956)
- Miller, Arthur H., "Political Issues and Trust in Government, 1964-1970", American Political Science Review, 68 (1974)
- Mishler, William, "The Supreme Court as Countermajoritarian institution? The impact of Public Opinion on Supreme Court Decisions", American Political Science Review, 87 (1993)
- Moon, Ronald T. Y., "Together, Courts and Media Can Improve Public Knowledge of the Justice System", Judicature, 87 (2004)
- "Access to Court Records and FOIA as a Legal Basis-Experience of Slovenia"[URL]
- Nickerson, Raymond S., "Confirmation Bias: A Ubiguitous Phenomenon in Many Guise", Review of General Psychology, 2(2) (1998)
- Olson, Susan M., "Explaining Public Attitudes toward Local Courts", Justice System Journal, 20 (1998)
- "Session 5 Panel: Access to Judgments (Abstract of presentation delivered at the 8th International Conference Law Via the Internet, Lexum, Montreal, October 26, 2007)"[URL]
- Prillaman, William C., "The Judiciary and Democratic Decay in Latin America" (2000)
- Rottman, David B., "On Public Trust and Confidence: Does Experience with the Courts Promote or Diminish it?", Court Review, (Winter) (1998)
- Rottman, David B., "Public Trust and Confidence in the Courts: What Public Opinion Surveys Mean to Judges", Court Review, (Fall) (1999)
- Scheindlin, Schira A., "Electonic Discovery and Digital Evidence" (2009)
- Siegel, Jane, "Group processes in Computer-mediated Communication", Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37 (1986)
- Snyder, David L., "Nonparty Remote Electronic Access to Plea Agreement in the Second Circuit", Fordham Urb. L.J., 35(5) (2008)
- Sobel, Allan D., "Building Public Trust and Confidence", Judicature, 89 (2005)
- Soden, Warwick, "Transparency, Accountability and Fighting Corruption in the Judiciary", International Conference & Showcase on Judicial Reforms (2005)
- Solove, Daniel J., "The Digital Person Technology and Privacy in the Information Age" (2004), New York University Press
- Spichal, Sigman L., "The Right to Know, In Access Denied: Freedom of Information in the Information Age" (2000)
- Steketee, Martha Wade, "Developing CCJ", COSCA Guidelines for Public Access to Court Records: a National Project to Assist State Courts, 2002
- Public Access to Court Records: Implementing the CCJ, "COSCA Guidelines Final Project Report", Steketee, Martha Wade, 2005
- Stimson, James A., "Dynamic Representation", American Political Science Review, 89 (1995)
- Sudbeck, Lynn Eicher, "Placing Court Records Online: Balancing Judicial Accountability with Public Trust and Confidence: An Analysis of State Court Electronic Access Policies and a Proposal for South Dakota Court Records", S.D.L. Rev., 51 (2006)
- Sunshine, Jason, "The Role of Procedural Justice and Legitimacy in Shaping Public Support for Policing", Law and Society Review, 37 (2003)
- Sztompka, Piotr, "Trust: A Sociological Theory" (2000), Cambridge University Press
- Tyler, T. R., "What is Procedural Justice? Criteria Used by Citizens to Assess the Fairness of Legal Procedures", Law and Society Review, 22 (1988)
- Tyler, T. R., "Governing amid Diversity: The Effect of Fair Decisionmaking Procedures on the Legitimacy of Government", Law and Society Review, 28 (1994)
- Tyler, T. R., "Why People Obey the Law" (2006)
- Ulbig, Stacy G., "Policies, Procedures, and the People: Sources of Support for Government?", Social Science Quarterly, 83 (2002)
- Highlights of a National Survey of the General Public, Judges, and Community Leaders, in State Courts: A Blueprint for the Future, "Yankelovich, Skelly", NCSC, ~ (1978)
- "The Public’s Right to Know", Article 19, ~ (1999)
- Submission on the Discussion Paper: Open Courts, Electronic Access to Court Records, and Privacy, "Canadian Bar Association", ~ (2004)
- Commission on Trial Court Performance Standards, "Trial Court Performance Standards and Measurement System" (1997), BJA
- Commission on Trial Court Performance Standards, "Trial Court Performance Standards with Commentary" (1997), BJA
- "White Paper on Promoting a Culture of Accountability and Transparency: Court System Performance Measures", Conference of State Court Administrators (2008)
- Judges Technology Advisory Committee, "Model Policy for Access to Court Records in Canada", Canadian Judicial Council, ~ (2005)
- FY 2000 Annual Report, "Judicial Council of Georgia", Administrative Office of the Courts of Georgia, ~ (2000)
- How the Public Views the State Courts: A 1999 National Survey, "National Center for State Courts", ~ (1999)
- Supreme Judicial Court’s Judiciary, "Guidelines on the Public Right of Access to Judicial Proceedings and Record", SJC Committee, ~ (2000)
- "Open Justice and Access to Court Information"[URL]
- Gerhard Knerr, "Die Veröffentlichung von Namen in gerichtlichen Entscheidungen" (2004)
- Lutz Meyer-Goßner, "Strafprozessordnung, 53., neu bearbeitete Aufl." (2010)