참고인의 허위녹취록과 허위진술서의 증거위조죄 객체 여부

Abstract

The admission of false statements by witnesses in criminal investigations has been a cause for concern in the Korean legal system. The destruction of evidence article details that a person who destructs, conceals, forges or alters evidence in a criminal or disciplinary case against another or who uses forged or altered evidence, shall be punishable by up to 5 years imprisonment or a fine. At present, however, a falsified written statement does not fall under the jurisdiction of the article, while a falsified record of a verbal statement does. That is to say, historically, the author of a falsified written statement is not accountable under the article. As precedence dictates, the value of any piece of evidence falsified under the destruction of evidence article is irrelevant, this study proposes that both written statements and records of statements should fall under the jurisdiction of the article. This study focuses on 2 cases, whereby a false statement given by a taxi driver involved in a minor traffic accident was found not guilty under the article, while the author of a falsified transcript of a pivotal conversation in a sexual abuse case was found guilty. Thus, it is clear that the precedent detailed above has not been adhered to, as the value of each piece of evidence and the severity of the crime itself appears to have been taken into account. In order to maintain clear and effective judicial functions, this study argues that such precedents must be adhered to, and thus the authors of both pieces of evidence mentioned above should have been punished according to the destruction of evidence article.