피의자신문시 변호인참여권 보장의 현황 및 문제점 (The Situation and Problems of Right for the Counsel to Participate in Suspect Interrogation in 2007 Revised Criminal Procedure Law of Korea)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국형사소송법학회
· 수록지 정보 : 형사소송 이론과 실무 / 6권 / 2호 / 133 ~ 149페이지
· 저자명 : 권창국

초록

피의자신문의 가시성에 부정적 견해는 진술이 이루어지는 환경의 비밀성과사적 친밀성이 떨어지게 됨으로써 효과적인 피의자신문이 불가능하다는 지적에근거한다. 일견 긍정적으로 생각해볼 여지도 있지만, 피의자신문은 결코 상담(counselling)이 아닌 피의자의 입장에서는 결코 진술하고 싶지 않은 또는 진술하기를 주저하게 되는 비밀의 로출로 그 본질적 성격은 강요(coercion)에 해당한다고 보아야 할 것이다. 종래 피의자, 피고인의 자백 등 제 진술과 관련하여임의성이 강조되어왔던 이유도 여기에 있다고 할 것이고, 자백배제법칙 등 진술증거와 관련한 증거법상 제 원칙도 자백 등 진술의 강요과정에서 야기되는 부작용을 억제하고자 고안된 것임을 부정할 수 없다.
이러한 의미에서, 피의자신문의 가시성 확보는 보다 적극적으로 이해되어야할 필요가 있으며, 형사소송법 개정을 통한 명문화에 더 나아가 그 실질적 정착이 이루어질 수 있도록 추가적인 고민이 이루어져야 할 필요가 있지 않을까 생각한다.

영어초록

As is well known, in 2007, South Korea has amended the CriminalProcedure Code, the accused was explicitly allow counsel to participatein the criminal interrogation procedure. However, prior to thisamendment of Criminal Procedure, the Supreme Court of Korea hasalready acknowledged the right to be informed of the 1992 Right tosilence the suspect, and even in the so-called National Security LawProfessor Song Du-yul violations in 2003, lawyers for the accusedallowed to participate in the interrogation course by presenting the caselaw to the effect that, proposed a similar vein and Korean Mirandapriciple of Miranda principle of the Supreme Court. In addition, Korea'sConstitutional Court to support the precedent of this Court wasestablished as an important precedent principle in criminal proceedings. With regard to whether or not you want to admit the counsel of the accused participated in the criminal interrogation course, the suspectconfessed closed due to interrogation process, forcing the other statements, whether as a violation of the rights of the other defendants have not observed from the outside, in fact, the constitutional principle of due process to expect compliance with considering the difficulties, there is a view that the so-called support necessary for the visibility of the accused interrogation procedure. On the other hand, suspects Revealing the interrogation rapport procedures to prevent the formation of external investigators and suspects, remove the confidentiality of the process by stating the function of the normal suspects eventuallynullified interrogation, the investigation because it can not achieve the purpose of opposition there are views.
Although this view also of contention, counsel for suspects to attend the city is settled in the institutional interrogation, and also exposed some problems. First, the reasons for attorneys to attend this exceptionally exclusion does not clear, is excluded according to the arbitrary discretion of law enforcement agencies is pointed out that these rights can be harnessed. Also, if the application of the principle involved lawyers, suspects the newspaper should be stopped, but the investigation is not so practical. And indeed the case when counsel for suspects to attend interrogation is extremely limited. After all, that really settled into the existing case law and legislative system that conforms to the degree we need to be closely examined. Below with the meaning of the so-called Korean Miranda priciple, to look at the issue of attorney to attend courses at the suspects interrogation.

참고자료

· 없음