일본의 재판원제도의 실정

Abstract

The criminal jury trial act was enforced in January, 2008 in Korea. The examination period for five years is due to finish and the final form of this system is to be started in 2013. On the other hand, the lay judge trial act was enforced in May, 2009 also in Japan, and the review is scheduled in 2012 which three years passed after enforcement. The former system has much more element of typical jury system than the latter. Therefore there is much difference in some important parts in both systems. For example, on the criminal jury trial in Korea, defendants have right to make selection between jury trial and traditional judge trial (We can call this aspect type of selection.), and the verdict conclusion jurors reached does not restrain judgment pronounced by judges (We can call this aspect type of advice). On the background of difference, we can say that people in Japan have had no negative evaluation to the conventional judicial system. And also both of the systems have difference in the contents of the regulation of Constitution on the right to take the trial. By the lay judge trial system in Japan we finished 4,163 cases almost smoothly in about three years, although the lay judges' job devotion period is so long as average 4.7 days. Many lay judges, before be assigned to, have the feeling they want not to be selected, but after finishing their job actually, do evaluate their experience affirmative. We can say that the basis of the lay judge trial system has been well-established to Japanese society, and it seems that no great correction is added to the system in case of review. However, it seems that on some important points, the criminal jury trial system in Korea gives suggestion to the lay judge trial system in Japan. On the criminal jury trial in Korea, for deciding a final form, the national justice participation committee has launched, and it is expected that an argument will be activated further from now on. Review of the selection by defendants, correction of the determination of exclusion,review of the effect of verdict are expected to be the main points at issue. Especially the point of the effect of verdict is most important. It can be understood that the Supreme Court of Korea has also such an understanding on the issues. The systems of Korea and Japan give the suggestion mutually. It is extremely beneficial for the development of law of the two countries,Korea and Japan. Both of countries should exchange information and opinions about the system of national justicetrialparticipation.