인공지능 거버넌스와 블록체인 발전에 따른 형사사법의 미래에 관한 소고

Abstract

The definition of artificial intelligence has become more important these days, when the development of artificial intelligence technology is commonly heard. Governance is also changing so that all administrative capabilities encompassing public and private services of the country can be provided by predicting the administrative utilization rate and demand for each individual citizen using artificial intelligence technology, which is gradually starting to be used as a universal technology. The discussion about the need to introduce artificial intelligence into governance seems to reflect the fact that there is a limit to information disclosure in the current system, that individual citizens' information needs vary according to the increase of various types of data, and that there is an intention to satisfy the desire for bottom-up participation. When an artificial intelligence program is developed, the program recognizes the environment and learns by accumulating data on its own. Even a robot that does not have the shape of a human being is a kind of computer and only a container for artificial intelligence, so the core is an artificial intelligence program. Even if the robot gains autonomy, it is also questionable whether it should be treated as a subject and object of human rights, the subject of rights. Just as it started from the policy necessity when recognizing the subjectivity of the rights of corporations, if the policy necessity to have the property of responsibility for intelligent robots or hardware equipped with artificial intelligence is recognized, it is possible to conclude logically that the subjectivity can possess the property of responsibility for “Liability Purposes” on a limited basis. Meanwhile, blockchain technology, which has been attracting attention due to the craze of virtual (crypto) currency around 2017, is a distributed ledger technology that verifies, records, and stores transaction details by all participants on the network. It is spreading rapidly beyond the financial sector, as the advantage of not requiring a financial aid is emphasized. Several countries are actively developing legislation related to blockchain technology including virtual (crypto) currency. In contrast, in Korea, the use of blockchain continues to expand, but in terms of the legal system, compliance with existing laws and regulations and various regulations act as an impediment to the development of the blockchain industry. In a reality where there is an expectation that blockchain technology will be used as main technology of the system that contributes the service in the public domain, it is worrying whether the intention to avoid the centralization of power can be well reflected in the criminal justice system. Due to the nature of the block chain, it has decentralized characteristics and distributed processing characteristics. The current criminal law and other administrative penalties are rules made on the premise of the existence of a PC terminal or central server, and now it is necessary to revise the system to reflect blockchain characteristics in the future. Rather, there may be questions about how it can be applied to the criminal justice system because the direction of the centralized AI and the distributed blockchain are different in the criminal justice system, which should be applied according to strict standards. It can be thought that the artificial intelligence core, which has learned strict standards, will draw clearer and faster conclusions than the legal application in the current human justice system, but as mentioned above, the expansion of artificial intelligence has the potential for a tendency to transform into a system focused on prevention and prevention of anticipated crime under the pretext of system advancement. In the end, rather than aiming for the unification in which artificial intelligence dominates most of the government's computer system, the decentralization characteristics of the blockchain system, the self-execution of the smart contract method, and the security that is difficult to track must be considered. As a step forward for digital democratization, blockchain can be used to build a criminal justice guidance system for the public. In addition, it will be excellent if the construction of a distributed encryption system for evidence preservation and viewing rights proceeds in the direction of configuring non-interfering nodes to operate only with independent artificial intelligence for each institution. Artificial intelligence should be introduced, but centralized artificial intelligence should be approached with caution when considering the infringement of personal information and the rights of third parties. Considering the situation in which blockchain is introduced and expanded in various fields such as finance, telecommunications, and commerce in the age of artificial intelligence development, the responsibility subjectivity of artificial intelligence applied here in the area of ​​shared responsibility where the blockchain system is difficult to track should be discussed, and it should be an opportunity to show that the criminal justice system can sufficiently keep up with technological developments.