진술증거와 비진술증거

Abstract

The majority view understands ‘statement evidence’, which corresponds to non-statement evidence, more broadly than ‘statement evidence’ to which the hearsay rule applies, resulting in inconsistency between the two. These classification criteria not only lead to conceptual confusion but also provide no theoretical or practical basis. ‘Statement evidence’ used in the Criminal Evidence Act must be the same and unified concept from beginning to end. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider that ‘statement evidence’, which corresponds to non-statement evidence, and ‘statement evidence’ to which the hearsay rule applies are the same. Statement evidence is a ‘statement of a person who has experienced the facts of the testimony’ and is intended to prove the truth of the facts of the testimony. Accordingly, even a person's statement can be either statement evidence or non-statement evidence depending on the facts. In other words, even if it is a human statement, it is statement evidence if it is the statement of a person who experienced the facts, and if not, it is non-statement evidence. Also, if a person's statement is non-statement evidence, the hearsay rule does not apply no matter how it is submitted to the court through a medium due to its nature as non-statement evidence.