본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

사법경찰관리의 내사와 검사의 지휘

Pre-investigation Activities by the Judicial Police and the Direction of the Public Prosecutor

0

조회

0

다운로드

3

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

Pre-investigation activities refer to activities that the judicial police and the public prosecutor confidentially perform to find out someone's criminal suspicion before they investigate about him as the suspect by criminal booking. They called as “an interim investigation case”, too. Pre-investigation activities are being used by the investigatory organizations as one of the effective methods for criminal investigation. Someone assert that pre-investigation activities can be included under the category of the investigation by expanding the concept of investigation. And the prosecution insist they have the right to direct pre-investigation activities by the police on ground for the Art. 196① of the Criminal Procedure Act. On the contrary to this, the police interpret pre-investigation activities is not the investigation, is the one of police operation based the Art. 3 of the Police Act and the Art. 2 of the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers. So, they assert the prosecutor can't command pre-investigation activities by the police on the ground for the right to lead investigation based on the Criminal Procedure Act. The revised Criminal Procedure Act allowed the right to start investigation to the police by the Art. 196 ② of the Criminal Procedure Act. And there is no the legal ground to command the prosecutor pre-investigation activities by the police because they are not investigation. Therefore I assert that the police can do pre-investigation activities without a direction of the prosecutor. In fact, it is impossible the prosecutor command all of pre-investigation activities by the police. But I think we have to grant the ex post facto supervision of the prosecutor against pre-investigation activities by the police to prevent the abuse and misuse of them because pre-investigation activities is related to criminal investigation. Furthermore I assert to strengthen the self-control by the police in connection to pre-investigation activities.

Abstract

Pre-investigation activities refer to activities that the judicial police and the public prosecutor confidentially perform to find out someone's criminal suspicion before they investigate about him as the suspect by criminal booking. They called as “an interim investigation case”, too. Pre-investigation activities are being used by the investigatory organizations as one of the effective methods for criminal investigation. Someone assert that pre-investigation activities can be included under the category of the investigation by expanding the concept of investigation. And the prosecution insist they have the right to direct pre-investigation activities by the police on ground for the Art. 196① of the Criminal Procedure Act. On the contrary to this, the police interpret pre-investigation activities is not the investigation, is the one of police operation based the Art. 3 of the Police Act and the Art. 2 of the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers. So, they assert the prosecutor can't command pre-investigation activities by the police on the ground for the right to lead investigation based on the Criminal Procedure Act. The revised Criminal Procedure Act allowed the right to start investigation to the police by the Art. 196 ② of the Criminal Procedure Act. And there is no the legal ground to command the prosecutor pre-investigation activities by the police because they are not investigation. Therefore I assert that the police can do pre-investigation activities without a direction of the prosecutor. In fact, it is impossible the prosecutor command all of pre-investigation activities by the police. But I think we have to grant the ex post facto supervision of the prosecutor against pre-investigation activities by the police to prevent the abuse and misuse of them because pre-investigation activities is related to criminal investigation. Furthermore I assert to strengthen the self-control by the police in connection to pre-investigation activities.

참고문헌 (26)

  1. 강동욱, "불심검문" (1994), 고시원
  2. 강동욱, "형사절차와 헌법소송" (2011), 동국대학교 출판부
  3. 신동운, "신형사소송법 (제2판)" (2010), 법문사
  4. 이동희, "수사론" (2009), 경찰공제회
  5. 이완규, "형사소송법특강" (2006), 법문사
  6. 이은모, (2011), 박영사
  7. 차용석, "형사소송법 (제4판)" (2012), 세기사
  8. 한국법학교수회, "내사와 수사의 본질과 한계 - 그에 대 한 법적 통제를 중심으로", 동계학술대회 (2011)
  9. 강동욱, "형사절차상 내사의 의의와 한계", 한양법학, 23(2), pp.11~31 (2012), 한양법학회[DOI]
  10. 경찰청 수사구조개혁단, "정의와 인권", (12) (2011)
  11. 권오걸, "수사절차로서의 내사에 대한 고찰", 형사법연구, 15 (2001), 한국형사법학회
  12. 김재덕, "내사의 허용범위와 통제방안", 법학논집, 16(1), pp.265~289 (2011), 법학연구소
  13. 서명수, "불구속 피의자․피고인의 변호인접견교통권", 대법원판례해설 제25호(96년 상반기), 법원도서관, ~ (1996)
  14. 신동운, "내사종결처분의 법적 성질", 서울대학교 법학, 45(3), pp.309~331 (2004), 법학연구소
  15. 정세종, "경찰의 내사활동에 관한 고찰", 한국공안행정학회보, 16(4), pp.339~362 (2007), 한국공안행정학회
  16. 정세종, "경찰내사의 활성화방안에 관한 연구", 한국경찰학회보, 13(4), pp.173~192 (2011), 한국경찰학회
  17. 정성진, "형사절차로서의 내사", 법학논총, 9(1) (1997), 국민대학교
  18. 정웅석, "내사사건의 통제방안에 관한 연구", 형사정책, 20(1), pp.279~300 (2008), 한국형사정책학회
  19. 정웅석, "2011년 개정 형사소송법 제196조에 대한 평가와 과제", 형사법의 신동향, (33), pp.1~90 (2011), 대검찰청
  20. 조광훈, "내사절차에서 피내사자의 인권보호에 관한 연구", 법학연구, 19(2), pp.299~357 (2009), 법학연구원
  21. 조광훈, "수사개시권 남용의 원인과 그 개선방안", 법학연구, 14(2), pp.299~332 (2011), 법학연구소
  22. 조광훈, "사법경찰관의 수사개시권의 통제에 관한 연구 - 사법경찰관의 내사의 통제를 중심으로 -", 형사법의 신동향, (34), pp.235~284 (2012), 대검찰청
  23. 조국, "검사의 수사지휘권 행사의 범위와 한계, In 한국 형사법학의 이론과 실제 : 정암 정성진 박사 고희기념논문집" (2010)
  24. 하태훈, "한국형사법학회 형사소송법 개정안에 대한 논평 - 수사 일반과 강제처분 부분 -", 형사법연구, 23(1), pp.3~26 (2011), 한국형사법학회
  25. 황문규, "개정 형사소송법상 경찰의 수사개시권 및 검사의 수사지휘권의 내용과 한계", 형사정책연구, 22(3), pp.1~36 (2011), 한국형사정책연구원
  26. 허인석, "내사의 법적 쟁점에 관한 연구, In 형사법 쟁점연구 II" (2010), 박영사

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (6건)