학술논문
변호인 작성의 법률의견서의 증거능력
이용수 15
- 영문명
- Admissibility of legal opinion written by legal counsel as evidence of guilt
- 발행기관
- 한국형사판례연구회
- 저자명
- 김우진(Woojin Kim)
- 간행물 정보
- 『형사판례연구』형사판례연구 제21권, 487~524쪽, 전체 38쪽
- 주제분류
- 법학 > 법학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2013.06.30
7,360원
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
The defendant consulted an attorney-at-law regarding legal issues which might constitute crimes before commencement of an investigation. The defendant received legal opinion from the counsel by e-mail, which was later seized and presented as evidence of guilt by investigative authority. The court of original instance rejected to accept written legal opinion from the counsel as evidence on the ground of Attorney-Client Privilege. The Supreme Court, however, deemed Attorney-Client Privilege is not rooted in our legal system. I concur with the opinion of the Supreme Court in that we have yet to find traditional or provisional basis for Attorney-Client Privilege. It is premature to acknowledge the concept of Attorney-Client Privilege without in-depth probe. Instead, the majority opinion of the Supreme Court looked to Articles 314 and 149 of the Criminal Procedure Act. Article 314 provides one of the exceptions to hearsay rule, which allows the written statement to be admitted as evidence of guilt without cross-examination against the person who wrote the statement, in case that the person is not available due to illness, unknown whereabouts, etc. as well as that the statement is proved to have been written under especially reliable circumstances. Article 149 confers the right to refuse to testify on the legal counsel regarding professional secrets he obtained in the course of business. The majority opinion of the Supreme Court ruled that Article 314 shall not apply in case that the legal counsel exercises his right to refuse to testify under Article 149. The majority opinion based its rationale on the fact that Article 314 had been revised with a tendency to reinforce oral hearing and direct examination by narrowing the scope of the exceptions to hearsay rule, as well as on the purpose Article 149 seeks to achieve. On the contrary, the dissenting opinion of the Supreme Court deemed that Article 314 shall apply in case of exercise of right for refusal of witness under Article 149. The dissenting opinion pointed out that Article 314 serves to discover the truth by allowing hearsay evidence under exceptional circumstances. According to the dissenting opinion, there is no difference between situation where the witness is unable to appear because of illness, etc. and situation where the witness exercises his right to refuse to testify when it comes to applying Article 314. I concur with the majority opinion of the Supreme Court. The witness who refuses to testify may or may not have lawful grounds to refuse. If he has sufficient lawful grounds, we should pay attention to the purpose of the Article which confers the right to refuse to testify. In this context, it stands to reason to declare that Article 314 shall not apply in case that the legal counsel exercises his right to refuse to testify under Article 149. By denying the admissibility of legal opinion as evidence of guilt, written by the legal counsel who lawfully exercises the right to refuse to testify, we can further the right to refuse to testify as well as the principle of oral hearing and direct examination.
목차
[대상판례 1] 대법원 2012. 5. 17. 선고 2009도6788 전원합의체 판결 [공2012하,1155]
Ⅰ. 사안의 개요
Ⅱ. 소송의 진행 경과
Ⅲ. 대상판결의 요지
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
- 공동주택의 공용공간에 대한 주거침입죄의 해석
- 2012년도 형법판례 회고
- 상당인과관계설의 상당성 판단기준을 위한 상당성의 구체화 작업 시도
- 변호인 작성의 법률의견서의 증거능력
- 검사의 신문과정상 참여수사관의 역할과 한계
- 수수된 금품에 직무관련성이 있는 업무에 대한 대가와 직무관련성이 없는 업무에 대한 사례가 혼재되어 있는 경우의 형사상 취급
- 소년법상 보호처분의 성격과 전자장치부착명령 요건과의 관계
- 의사의 설명의무위반의 효과와 가정적 승낙의 법리(판례평석)
- 현실거래에 의한 시세조종과 매매유인 목적
- 온라인게임 계정거래와 정보훼손죄 성립여부
- 무수혈과 관련된 의료과실치사죄
- 업무방해죄에 있어서 업무의 보호가치에 대한 검토
- 형법에서 사자의 점유
- 진술과 기록의 증거능력
- 과학적 증거 의 증거법적 평가
- 편면적 대향범에 가담한 자에 대한 형법총칙상 공범규정의 적용가부
- 횡령죄의 미수범 성립여부
- 특신상태의 의의와 판단기준
- 강제채혈의 성질 및 허용요건
- 횡령죄의 기수성립에 관한 논의 구조
참고문헌
관련논문
최근 이용한 논문
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!