전자증거의 진정성과 전문법칙의 적용

• 영문명: Theauthenticationofelectronicevidencesandthe applicationofhearsayruleofthem inKorea
• 발행기관: 한국형사판례연구회
• 저자명: 심희기(Huigi Sim)
• 간행물 정보: 『형사판례연구』형사판례연구 제22권, 495~520쪽, 전체 26쪽
• 주제분류: 법학 > 법학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2014.06.30

영문 초록

So-called Wang-jaesan decision (2013do2511) was declared by ‘Korean Supreme Court (hereafter ‘KSC ) in July, 2013. The decision had a lot of important substantial and procedural issues in criminal spheres. However, what I have tried to concentrate in this review are only two issues, the one is the issue of the authenticity of electronic evidence (or digital evidence), the other is the issue of the application of ‘the Korean version hearsay rule (hereafter ‘KHR ) of the electronic evidence. The methodology of this review is the comparative analysis of the Wang-jaesan decision from the perspective of Federal Rules of Evidence (hereafter ‘FRE’). In Wang-jaesan decision KSC defined the concept of integrity of electronic evidence as ‘the contents of the digital data have not been altered in any manner from the moment that were seized or ‘that evidence wasn t changed after it was captured or collected. The meaning of this concept is different from the meaning of the traditional ‘exactness of utterances (成立의 眞正) of article 312, 312 of KHR. That concept was made from the unique Korean modern legal history. However, it cannot deal with so many hard cases properly. Therefore I suggest in chapter Ⅰ, Ⅱ, Ⅲ, Ⅳ that We Korean legal scholars and practitioners should adopt the concept of authentication something like FRE, even though Korean Criminal Procedure Law does not have clear stipulations about it. In chapter Ⅴ, Ⅵ I did comparing analyses about the applications of KHR by KSC since 1990 s up to the 2010 s. I found that KSC has adopted enormously FRE when there were no clear stipulations in Korean Criminal Procedure Law. This is a kind of interesting phenomenon which deserves to be analyzed from the perspective of comparative law and global legal transplant of evidence rule.

목차

[대상판결] 대법원 2013. 7. 26. 선고 2013도2511 판결

Ⅰ. 전문예외요건으로서의 진정성립 개념과 구별되는 증거의 진정성 개념의 설정필요성

Ⅱ. FRE의 증거의 진정성 개념

Ⅲ. 전자증거의 진정성 개념

Ⅳ. 전자증거의 진정성(무결성) 입증방법의 다양성

Ⅴ. 전문법칙의 적용이 있는 전자문건과 전문법칙의 적용이 없는 전자문건

Ⅵ. 직접증거로 사용할 때 전문증거가 되는 증거라도 간접사실에 대한 정황증거로 사용할 수 있는가(긍정)

Ⅶ. 결어

키워드

주장 진술 전문 비전문 전자증거 진정성 assertion statement hearsay non-hearsay digital evidence electronic evidence authentication