피해자의 관점에서 유죄답변협상의 제한적 실현
The Limited Realization of Plea bargaining from the Perspective of Victim
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In Korean Legal System, there is no legal negotiation in the criminal procedure. The Department of Justice pronounced the Criminal Procedure Code and Criminal Code amendment containing the plea bargaining on July 13, 2011. And this system has envisaged in the National Assembly. Through this system "Justice collaborators"who filed the charges, or penalties can be exempted. The debate has continued for a long time whether it is necessary to introduce the plea negotiation. There has been discussion about the introduction of americanized plea bargaining. Supporters have emphasized the processing of the investigation and efficiency. On the other hand,opponents have emphasized infringement of the right of the accused. But always the victim's presence in this debate have been excluded. In this article, the introduction of plea negotiations desirable and what is absolutely necessary to introduce any restrictions must be considered will review. The most important party to be considered is crime victim bringing the plea bargaining into our criminal justice system Negotiations have already "existed" and, for the processing of the case quickly the introduction of plea negotiations is desirable by considering the presence of the victim, so it is natural decision to introduce very "limitedly" in the case of victimless crimes and organized crime cases. New regulations in consultation with the victim should be introduced in the procedure. The limited negotiations should be conducted the criminal mediation should be utilized broadly. In short, the limited introduction of plea negotiations is necessary and victim should be considered. It is the duty of state and criminal law to protect the legal interests of citizens of the country.
Abstract
In Korean Legal System, there is no legal negotiation in the criminal procedure. The Department of Justice pronounced the Criminal Procedure Code and Criminal Code amendment containing the plea bargaining on July 13, 2011. And this system has envisaged in the National Assembly. Through this system "Justice collaborators"who filed the charges, or penalties can be exempted. The debate has continued for a long time whether it is necessary to introduce the plea negotiation. There has been discussion about the introduction of americanized plea bargaining. Supporters have emphasized the processing of the investigation and efficiency. On the other hand,opponents have emphasized infringement of the right of the accused. But always the victim's presence in this debate have been excluded. In this article, the introduction of plea negotiations desirable and what is absolutely necessary to introduce any restrictions must be considered will review. The most important party to be considered is crime victim bringing the plea bargaining into our criminal justice system Negotiations have already "existed" and, for the processing of the case quickly the introduction of plea negotiations is desirable by considering the presence of the victim, so it is natural decision to introduce very "limitedly" in the case of victimless crimes and organized crime cases. New regulations in consultation with the victim should be introduced in the procedure. The limited negotiations should be conducted the criminal mediation should be utilized broadly. In short, the limited introduction of plea negotiations is necessary and victim should be considered. It is the duty of state and criminal law to protect the legal interests of citizens of the country.
참고문헌 (47)
- Plea Bargaining 제도와 그 도입문제, Plea Bargaining 제도에 관한 연구, "금태섭", 검찰미래기획단, ~ (2006)
- 미국의 답변협상실태와 자백감면절차 도입방안, Plea Bargaining 제도에 관한 연구, "김봉주", 검찰미래기획단, ~ (2006)
- 김성룡, "독일 개정 형사소송법상 협상제도의 주요내용과 시사", 법학연구, 51(1), pp.137~164 (2010), 법학연구소
- 김성룡, "형사소송법상 협상제도(Ⅰ)-현행 독일형사소송법상 협상제도의 운용기준-", 법학논고, (22) (2005)
- 김신규, "유죄협상(Plea Bargaining)제도에 대한 비판적 검토", 미국헌법연구, 22(2), pp.87~132 (2011), 미국헌법학회
- 류전철, "약속에 의한 자백과 유죄협상(PleaBargaining)", 비교형사법연구, 7(2(2)), pp.203~226 (2005), 한국비교형사법학회
- 류전철, "형사소송에서 유죄협상제도(Plea Bargaining)의 도입가능성", 비교형사법연구, 7(1), pp.203~226 (2005), 한국비교형사법학회
- 박용철, "미국의 유죄 협상제(Plea Bargaining)에 대한 제고", 비교형사법연구, 7(1), pp.439~470 (2005), 한국비교형사법학회
- 송광섭, "현행 형사사법절차에서의 범죄피해자의 권리와 보호", 한국피해자학회 한국형사정책연구원 공동국제학술회의 <세계 속의 한국 피해자학> 자료집 (2012)
- 安 晟 秀, "한국의 공판정 자백과 미국의 유죄답변 협상제도", 저스티스, (91), pp.91~126 (2006), 한국법학원
- 안원하, "유죄협상과 형사절차를 통한 정의의 실현", 법학연구, 52(1), pp.257~281 (2011), 법학연구소
- 유상민, "미국 유죄답변 협상의 활용 실태와 도입 가능성", 국외훈련검사 연구논문집, (26) (2011)
- 유인학, "형사법상 유죄답변절차에서의 사법협상의 법리와 그 개선책에 대한 연구 : 타협에 의한 정의의 사법 형태론적 분석을 중심으로", 한양대 법학논총, (2) (1985)
- 윤동호, "형사절차와 협상" (2003), 한국형사정책연구원
- 이경재, "영미법상 피해자 없는 범죄의 유형", 피해자학연구, (5) (1997), 한국피해자학회
- 이용식, "유죄답변협상제도의 도입에 대한 비판적 검토-피해자의 관점에서 제기하는 반론-", 형사법연구, 19(2), pp.207~228 (2007), 한국형사법학회
- 이영란, "미국의 유죄답변협상제도" (1994), 한국형사정책연구원
- 조국, "유죄답변협상 도입의 필요성과 실현 방안 -‘자백감면절차’ 신설을 위한 제언-", 저스티스, (90), pp.224~249 (2006), 한국법학원
- 조 국, "약속’에 의한 자백획득은 불법인가?", 법률신문, (3280) (2004)
- 하태훈, "신속한 재판의 원칙과 법치국가이념", 안암법학, (7) (1998), 안암법학회
- 하태훈, "형사소송절차상의 협상제도", 비교형사법연구, 6(2-1), pp.211~238 (2004), 한국비교형사법학회
- Abert W. Alschuler, "Plea Bargaining and Its History", Law & Society Review, 13(2) (1979), Special Issue on Plea Bargaining
- Arenella, Peter, "Rethinking the Functions of Criminal Procedure : The Warren and Burger Courts' Competing Ideologies", Geo. L. J, 185 (1983)
- Ball, Jeremy D., "Is It a Prosecutor's World? : Determinants of Court Bargaining Decisions", Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 22(241) (2006)
- Chilton, Bradley S., "Reforming Plea Bargaining to Facilitate Ethical Discourse", Criminal Justice Policy Review (1991)
- Coloquitt, Joseph A., "Ad Hoc Plea Bargaining", Tulane Law Review, 75(695) (2001)
- Covey, Russell D., "Longitudinal Guilt : Repeat Offenders, Plea Bargaining, Plea Bargaining as Compromise", Yale Law Journal, 101, pp.1991~1992 (1969)
- Gertz, Marc G., "The Dynamics of Plea Bargaining in Three Countries", Criminal Justice Review (1990)
- Herzog, Sergio, "Plea Bargaining Practices: Less Covert, More Public Support?", Crime and Delinquency (2004)
- Kaplan, John, "American Merchandising and the Guilty Plea : Replacing the Bazaar with the Department Store", Am. J. Crim. L, 215 (1977)
- "LaFave, Wayne R.", Israel, Jerold H., Kerr, Orin S., Criminal Procedure, West, 2001[DOI]
- Langer, Máximo, "From Legal Transplants to Legal Translations: The Globalization of Plea Bargaining and the Americanization Thesis in Criminal Procedure", Havard International Law Journal, 45(1) (2004)
- Sabor, Monika, "Plea Bargaining : A Neglected Issue?", Probation Journal (1985)
- Semukhina, Olga B., "Plea Bargaining Implementation and Acceptance in Modern Russia : A Disconnect Between the Legal Institutions and the Citizens", International Criminal Justice Review, 19 (2009)
- Sung-Hee Lee, "The Scales of Justice : Balancing Neutrality and Efficiency in Plea-Bargaining Encounters" (2005), Discourse and Society
- Park, Roger C., "Evidence Law : A Student's Guide to the Law of Evidence as Applied in American Trials(Second Edition)" (2004)
- Palermo, George B, "Plea Bargaining: Injustice for All?", International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 42(111) (1998)
- Sabor, Monika, "Plea Bargaining: A Neglected Issue?", Probation Journal, 32, pp.139~ (1985)
- Schulhofer, Stephen J., "Plea Bargaining as Disaster", Yale Law Journal, 101, pp.1991~1992 (1979)
- Scott, Robert E, "Plea Bargaining as Contract", Yale Law Journal, 101 (1991)
- Stopp, Margaret T, "Evidence Law in the Trial Process" (1999)
- "Sould we really "ban" pleabargaining?: the core concerns of plea bargaining critics", emory law journal, 47(754) (1998)
- Fisher, George, "Plea Bargaing's Triumph", Yale Law Journal, 109 (2000)
- Weigend, Tomas, "Abrache in ausländischen Strafverfahren", 37~ (1990)
- Whitman, Peter A, "Judicial Plea Bargaining", Stan. L. Rev, 19 (1967)
- Wolfe, Major Stefan R., "Pretrial Agreements : Going Beyond that Guilty Plea", Army Law, 27 (2010)
- Baehr-Jones, Vanessa, "A "Catch-22" for Mentally-ill Military Defendants : Plea-Batgaining Away Mental Health Benefits", Mil. L. Rev, 51 (2010)