본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

자백배제법칙의 근거와 임의성의 판단 - 위법배제설의 관점에서 본 형사소송법 제309조의 의미 재검토 -

The Rationale of the Confession Rule and the Voluntariness

0

조회

0

다운로드

10

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

It has been controversial topic on the rational of the confession rule, enacted in the article 309 of Korean Criminal Procedure Code. The article 309 provides the exclusion of involuntary confessions made under torture, battery, threat, deceit or after prolonged custody as well as confessions whose voluntariness is doubtful. There has been a lot of arguments surrounding this article, and they are mainly about the reason why the confession taken under some wrongful situations is inadmissible - which is because the confession is illegal or does not have reliability. If we take reliability test, the confession is excluded based on its reliability, not on its voluntariness. Then confession is admissible when it is reliable even though obtained involuntarily. It may, therefore, be resonable conclude that the confession is excluded because it is obtained illegally. Korean Criminal Procedure Code amendment imposed the exclusionary rule of illegally collected evidence on the article 308-2 lately. It means any evidence cannot be obtained through the violation of due process of law. This article, however, has not been settled yet. The argument on the scope and the standard of the exclusionary rule still goes on. Moreover, this revision makes another issue on the relation between the confession rule and the exclusionary rule. If the exclusion of confession is based on its illegality, the matter is which principle - exclusionary rule or confession rule - is applied on that process. Under the situation like that, this study tries to make a new approach to interpret 'illegality' which can make difference between illegality on the article 309 and the 308-2.

Abstract

It has been controversial topic on the rational of the confession rule, enacted in the article 309 of Korean Criminal Procedure Code. The article 309 provides the exclusion of involuntary confessions made under torture, battery, threat, deceit or after prolonged custody as well as confessions whose voluntariness is doubtful. There has been a lot of arguments surrounding this article, and they are mainly about the reason why the confession taken under some wrongful situations is inadmissible - which is because the confession is illegal or does not have reliability. If we take reliability test, the confession is excluded based on its reliability, not on its voluntariness. Then confession is admissible when it is reliable even though obtained involuntarily. It may, therefore, be resonable conclude that the confession is excluded because it is obtained illegally. Korean Criminal Procedure Code amendment imposed the exclusionary rule of illegally collected evidence on the article 308-2 lately. It means any evidence cannot be obtained through the violation of due process of law. This article, however, has not been settled yet. The argument on the scope and the standard of the exclusionary rule still goes on. Moreover, this revision makes another issue on the relation between the confession rule and the exclusionary rule. If the exclusion of confession is based on its illegality, the matter is which principle - exclusionary rule or confession rule - is applied on that process. Under the situation like that, this study tries to make a new approach to interpret 'illegality' which can make difference between illegality on the article 309 and the 308-2.

참고문헌 (30)

  1. 강구진, "형사소송법원론" (1982), 학연사
  2. 송광섭, "형사소송법" (2010), 형설출판사
  3. 노명선, "형사소송법" (2009), 성균관대학교 출판부
  4. 배종대, "신형사소송법(제3판)" (2011), 홍문사
  5. 백형구, "형사소송법강의(제8정판)" (2001), 박영사
  6. 백형구, "조해 형사소송법" (2002), 법률문화원
  7. 손동권, "형사소송법(개정신판)" (2010), 세창출판사
  8. 송광섭, "형사소송법" (2010), 형설출판사
  9. 신동운, "신형사소송법(제3판)" (2011), 법문사
  10. 신양균, "형사소송법(신판)" (2009), 화산미디어
  11. 이은모, "형사소송법(제2판)" (2011), 박영사
  12. 이재상, "신형사소송법(제2판)" (2011), 박영사
  13. 임동규, "형사소송법(제7판)" (2011), 법문사
  14. 정웅석, "형사소송법(전정 제3판)" (2009)
  15. 차용석, "형사소송법(제3판)" (2008), 21세기사
  16. 박상기, "자백의 임의성과 증거능력에 관한 연구" (1995), 한국형사정책연구원
  17. 조국, "위법수집증거배제법칙" (2005), 박영사
  18. 형사소송법 개정특별위원회, "형사소송법 개정연구" (2010), 한국형사정책연구원 연구총서 10-14
  19. 류지영, "위법수집증거배제법칙 - 개정 형사소송법 제308조의2와 관련하여 -", 법학연구, (29), pp.311~330 (2008), 한국법학회
  20. 백형구, "형사소송법 제309조의 입법취지와 적용범위" (1985), 월간고시
  21. 백형구, "자백의 임의성 법칙" (2001), 고시연구
  22. 안 성 수, "자백 배제의 원칙과 특신성", 저스티스, (101)통권 : 101, pp.168~204 (2007), 한국법학원
  23. 유두열, "위법수집증거배제법칙과 자백배제법칙의 관계", 법학논집, 30(2) (2008), 청주대학교 법학연구소
  24. 윤종행, "적법절차를 따르지 아니하고 수집한 압수물의 증거능력 - 대판 2007. 11. 15, 2007도3061() 공직선거법위반 -", 형사법연구, 19(4), pp.329~354 (2007), 한국형사법학회
  25. 이삼, "자백배제법칙에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2001
  26. 이은모, "자백배제법칙의 근거와 임의성의 입증", 법학논총, 24(2) (2007), 법학연구소
  27. 이찬엽, "소송절차상 자백배제법칙의 합리적 적용에 관한 소고", 경찰학논총, 6(1), pp.205~230 (2011), 경찰학연구소
  28. 정준섭, "개정 형사소송법과 자백의 증거능력", 중앙법학, 9(3), pp.165~192 (2007), 중앙법학회
  29. 조국, "자백배제법칙’의 근거와 효과 그리고 ‘임의성’ 입증", 서울대학교 법학, 43(1) (2002), 서울대학교 법학연구소
  30. 조국, "위법수집증거배제법칙 재론", 사법, 1(3), pp.197~221 (2008), 사법발전재단

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (14건)