법이 정한 절차에 따르지 아니하고 수집된 압수물의 증거능력

Abstract

The exclusionary rule provides that any evidence obtained in violation of due process of law is not admissible in a criminal prosecution to guilt. In Korea, the reformed criminal procedural law which came in effect from January first 2008 introduced the exclusionary rule, and the Supreme Court decided that illegally seized evidence may not be admitted at a trial to show the defendant's guilt. Therefore, the debate on the admissibility of illegally seized evidence will be focused on the scope and standard of the exclusionary rule. But, the decision of the Supreme Court did not completely settle the issue of debate on the scope and standard of the exclusionary rule. Moreover, the decision of the Supreme Court divided into major opinion and different opinion, and both of them did not explicitly present the concrete standard of the exclusionary rule which exclude the admissibility of illegally seized evidence at a trial to show the defendant's guilt. In the decision of the Supreme Court, the point in dispute is related to whether any evidence obtained in violation of due process of law is in principle not admissible or only evidence obtained in serious violation of due process of law is not admissible at a trial to show the defendant's guilt. Finally, this point in dispute is about the scope and standard of the exclusionary rule. In this context, this article annotated the major opinion and different opinion in decision of the Supreme Court after the comparative investigation on the scope and standard of the exclusionary rule.