피의자신문시 변호인참여권 보장의 현황 및 문제점

• 영문명: The Situation and Problems of Right for the Counsel to Participate in Suspect Interrogation in 2007 Revised Criminal Procedure Law of Korea
• 발행기관: 한국형사소송법학회
• 저자명: 권창국(Chang Kook Kwon)
• 간행물 정보: 『형사소송 이론과 실무』제6권 제2호, 133~149쪽, 전체 17쪽
• 주제분류: 법학 > 법학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2014.12.31

영문 초록

As is well known, in 2007, South Korea has amended the Criminal Procedure Code, the accused was explicitly allow counsel to participate in the criminal interrogation procedure. However, prior to this amendment of Criminal Procedure, the Supreme Court of Korea has already acknowledged the right to be informed of the 1992 Right to silence the suspect, and even in the so-called National Security Law Professor Song Du-yul violations in 2003, lawyers for the accused allowed to participate in the interrogation course by presenting the case law to the effect that, proposed a similar vein and Korean Miranda priciple of Miranda principle of the Supreme Court. In addition, Korea's Constitutional Court to support the precedent of this Court was established 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 suspect confessed 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 eventually nullified 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.

목차

Ⅰ. 들어가는 말

Ⅱ. 피의자신문시 변호인 참여권과 관련한 이론적 논의

Ⅲ. 2007년 개정 형사소송법의 피의자신문시 변호인 참여권

Ⅳ. 제도적 개선을 위한 대안

Ⅴ. 결론

참고문헌

Abstract

키워드

변호인 변호인 참석권 변호인 조력권 미란다원칙 피의자신문 suspect interrogation right for counselling of attorney Miranda principle coercion of testimony voluntariness of testimony