학술논문
수사상 영상녹화물의 증거활용에 대한 비판적 검토
이용수 166
- 영문명
- A Critical Study on Admissibility of Interrogation Videotape
- 발행기관
- 한국형사법학회
- 저자명
- 김봉수(KIM Bong Su)
- 간행물 정보
- 『형사법연구』형사법연구 제20권 제3호, 167~196쪽, 전체 30쪽
- 주제분류
- 법학 > 법학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2008.01.26
6,400원
구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.
국문 초록
영문 초록
In the 2007, Criminal Procedure Code was amended on a large scale. But the 2007 revision on the Article 312 of the Criminal Procedure Code was dissatisfied. Because the National Assembly decided to maintain the evidentiary power of the prosecutors" interrogation dossiers in this revision. The result was that the revised Criminal Procedure Code failed to overcome the vice by dossiers.
To make matters worse, the importation of interrogation videotaping system give rise to great confusion in a controversy on admissibility of the prosecutors" interrogation dossiers. Originally the object of interrogation videotaping shall be to guarantee the circumstantial trustworthiness. But the current discussion on interrogation videotapes went diverge from the original object of interrogation videotaping. In particular, all that matters is the prosecution"s intention to use interrogation videotapes not as facts in the support of “interrogation circumstances" in which a suspect had given a statement but as evidences in the support of "contents itself" of a suspect"s statement.
However prosecution"s insistence regarding the evidential power of the videotapes recorded during interrogation is contradictory to the “Excluding Rule of Hearsay". Because the intrinsic attribute of interrogation videotapes is a hearsay evidence to the last.
Consequently it is desirable that the videotapes may be used only as the supporting evidence to refresh the memory of a suspect or a witness and as when it is necessary to support the circumstantial legality during interrogation, (for example, the absence of the torture and harsh treatment and the observance of Miranda rule etc.)
To make matters worse, the importation of interrogation videotaping system give rise to great confusion in a controversy on admissibility of the prosecutors" interrogation dossiers. Originally the object of interrogation videotaping shall be to guarantee the circumstantial trustworthiness. But the current discussion on interrogation videotapes went diverge from the original object of interrogation videotaping. In particular, all that matters is the prosecution"s intention to use interrogation videotapes not as facts in the support of “interrogation circumstances" in which a suspect had given a statement but as evidences in the support of "contents itself" of a suspect"s statement.
However prosecution"s insistence regarding the evidential power of the videotapes recorded during interrogation is contradictory to the “Excluding Rule of Hearsay". Because the intrinsic attribute of interrogation videotapes is a hearsay evidence to the last.
Consequently it is desirable that the videotapes may be used only as the supporting evidence to refresh the memory of a suspect or a witness and as when it is necessary to support the circumstantial legality during interrogation, (for example, the absence of the torture and harsh treatment and the observance of Miranda rule etc.)
목차
Ⅰ. 서설 - 형사소송법의 개정과 영상녹화제도의 도입
Ⅱ. 수사기관에 의한 영상녹화제도의 도입과정
Ⅲ. 수사상 영상녹화물의 소송법적 의미 - 『수사상 진술의 현출방법』인가, 『실질적 진정성립의 입증수단』인가?
Ⅳ. 영상녹화물의 본증 사용 가능성에 대한 비판적 검토
Ⅴ. 『조서』의 증거가치에 대한 근본적인 회의(懷疑)
Ⅵ. 결론 - 전문증거배제 법칙의 본래 의미로의 회귀
[Abstract]
Ⅱ. 수사기관에 의한 영상녹화제도의 도입과정
Ⅲ. 수사상 영상녹화물의 소송법적 의미 - 『수사상 진술의 현출방법』인가, 『실질적 진정성립의 입증수단』인가?
Ⅳ. 영상녹화물의 본증 사용 가능성에 대한 비판적 검토
Ⅴ. 『조서』의 증거가치에 대한 근본적인 회의(懷疑)
Ⅵ. 결론 - 전문증거배제 법칙의 본래 의미로의 회귀
[Abstract]
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
참고문헌
교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!
신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.
바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!