아동 성범죄피해자 진술 영상녹화물 특례규정에 대한 위헌결정과 입법적 대안 고찰
A Study on the Constitutional Court's decision on unconstitutionality of the provisions on video recording for victims of child sex violence and its legislative alternatives
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The Constitutional Court ruled that the legal provision in 「Sexual Violence Prevention and Victims Protection Act」 recognizing the admissibility of evidence of ‘video recorded Testimony of victims of sexual violence under 19 years old’ were unconstitutional. The reason is that the defendant's right to cross-examine is violated through the provision. Many revised bills have been proposed to eliminate this unconstitutional situation. In particular, the Ministry of Justice submitted a bill that suggested various alternatives based on the ‘Barnahus Model’. The system allows to conduct investigation in child-friendly facilities. To this end, several institutions including law enforcement agencies cooperate with each other “under one roof”. Through Barnahus model, it is possible to prevent a lot of secondary damage to child victims. In addition, the bill intends to investigate victims of child sexual abuse through a investigator with professional qualifications. On the other hand, ‘procedure for the preservation of evidence’ can be performed by a judge at the investigation stage. It is expected that the defendant's right to cross-examine can be guaranteed through this procedure. The Constitutional Court's decision has validity, in other words the defendant's right to cross-examine should be guaranteed legitimately. Nevertheless, there are also many problems with the above decision. For instance there is a risk of increasing secondary damage to child victims. The current legal situation needs to be resolved as soon as possible. There should be a plan to prevent secondary damage to the victim while guaranteeing the defendant's right to cross-examination. In this regard, the recent bill proposed by the Ministry of Justice can be an good alternative. However, it is the time when researches are needed to discover and solve the problems of the bill.
Abstract
The Constitutional Court ruled that the legal provision in 「Sexual Violence Prevention and Victims Protection Act」 recognizing the admissibility of evidence of ‘video recorded Testimony of victims of sexual violence under 19 years old’ were unconstitutional. The reason is that the defendant's right to cross-examine is violated through the provision. Many revised bills have been proposed to eliminate this unconstitutional situation. In particular, the Ministry of Justice submitted a bill that suggested various alternatives based on the ‘Barnahus Model’. The system allows to conduct investigation in child-friendly facilities. To this end, several institutions including law enforcement agencies cooperate with each other “under one roof”. Through Barnahus model, it is possible to prevent a lot of secondary damage to child victims. In addition, the bill intends to investigate victims of child sexual abuse through a investigator with professional qualifications. On the other hand, ‘procedure for the preservation of evidence’ can be performed by a judge at the investigation stage. It is expected that the defendant's right to cross-examine can be guaranteed through this procedure. The Constitutional Court's decision has validity, in other words the defendant's right to cross-examine should be guaranteed legitimately. Nevertheless, there are also many problems with the above decision. For instance there is a risk of increasing secondary damage to child victims. The current legal situation needs to be resolved as soon as possible. There should be a plan to prevent secondary damage to the victim while guaranteeing the defendant's right to cross-examination. In this regard, the recent bill proposed by the Ministry of Justice can be an good alternative. However, it is the time when researches are needed to discover and solve the problems of the bill.
참고문헌 (18)
- 권순민, "성폭력 범죄 관련 특별법상 소위 영상녹화제도의 위헌성과 합리적 운영방안에 대한 검토", 법학논총, 21(3), pp.737~771 (2014), 법학연구원
- 김병수, "증거보전절차에 의한 아동 성폭력범죄 피해자 보호와 피고인의 반대신문권의 조화방안", 형사법의 신동향, (74), pp.139~168 (2022), 대검찰청[DOI]
- 김혁, "19세 미만 성폭력 피해자 진술의 영상녹화물과 피고인의 반대신문권 - 헌법재판소 2021. 12. 23. 선고 2018헌바524 결정을 중심으로", 형사법연구, 34(1), pp.87~126 (2022), 한국형사법학회
- 김현동, "아동 성폭력 범죄피해자 지원 기관의 실태에 관한 연구- 해바라기아동센터를 중심으로 -", 경찰학논총, 8(2), pp.201~220 (2013), 경찰학연구소[DOI]
- 박상기, "성범죄 피해아동의 진술의 신빙성 판단 기준 - 독일법원판결을 중심으로 -", 피해자학연구, 24(1), pp.197~219 (2016), 한국피해자학회
- 박정난, "수사상 증거보전으로서 증인신문 제도에 대한 비판적 검토", 법학연구, 31(4), pp.201~231 (2021), 법학연구원
- 방희선, "형사소송법상 증거보전제도에 관한 고찰", 저스티스, (110), pp.180~193 (2009), 한국법학원
- 윤소현, "성폭력 피해자 진술 영상녹화물의 증거사용에 대한 고찰", 형사법의 신동향, (74), pp.169~201 (2022), 대검찰청[DOI]
- 이재상, "형사소송법" (2019), 박영사
- 이은모, "형사소송법" (2019), 박영사
- 전윤경, "성범죄 및 아동학대범죄에 대한 형사절차에 있어서 아동 피해자 진술의 확보 방안", 이화젠더법학, 14(1), pp.1~43 (2022), 젠더법학연구소[DOI]
- 정웅석, "신형사소송법" (2021), 박영사
- 최병각, "영상녹화물에 수록된 성폭력범죄피해자의 진술", 동아법학, (50), pp.201~230 (2011), 법학연구소
- 황은영, "수사실무에서 아동 피해자 조사의 문제점과 개선 방향", 피해자학연구, 18(2), pp.61~81 (2010), 한국피해자학회
- "Comparative Review of Legislation Related to Barnahus in Nordic Countries" (2020)[URL]
- "The Barnahus Model Across the Broader European Context" (2021)[URL]
- "미성년 성폭력 피해자 맞춤형 증거보전절차도입- 성폭력처벌법 개정안 국무회의 통과-", 법무부 2022년 6월 29일자 보도자료, ~ (2022)
- "법무부, 성폭력 피해아동을 위한 아동친화적인증거보전 제도 도입 추진 위헌 결정에 따른 대안입법 성폭력처벌법 개정안 입법예고 -", 법무부 2022년 4월 14일자 보도자료, ~ (2022)
