• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.10
• /
• pp.249-276
• /
• 1997

• Proceedings of the Korea Contents Association Conference
• /
• 2013.05a
• /
• pp.191-192
• /
• 2013

형사소송의 목적은 사안의 진상을 밝혀 적정한 형벌권을 실현하는데 있다. 수사기관은 범죄사실을 명백히 밝히기 위하여 아직도 과학적인 수사보다는 자백에 의존하는 경향이 있다는 것은 주지의 사실이다. 수사를 함에 있어 자백에 의존하는 것은 고문 등 강압수사의 위험성이 크다. 이를 방지하기 위하여 형사소송법 제309조는 자백배제법칙을 채택하고 있다. 자백배제법칙을 검토함에 있어서는 무엇보다도 먼저 자백의 임의성에 대한 입증을 살펴보아야 할 것이다. 따라서 본고는 강압수사방지를 위하여 자백의 임의성에 대한 거증책임 문제, 임의성의 기초사실증명 등에 관하여 몇 가지 쟁점을 검토하고자 한다.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.13
• /
• pp.411-437
• /
• 2000

It is unsafe to attempt a complete definition of the expression 'perils of the seas', because in practice the question 'what is a peril of the seas' is inextricably woven up with the further question, 'was the loss proximately caused by the sea peril ?' Such casualties as stranding, collision and heavy weather appear with monotonous regularity in the daily reports, and are the obvious examples. However, what can be included in the term 'perils of the seas' seems to be inexhaustible, although most circumstances appear to have been covered by the Courts. Two cases heard in 1887 were instrumental in defining perils of the seas. In The Xantho Lord Herschell made the following remarks: "The term ... does not cover every accidents or casualty which may happen to the subject matter of insurance on the sea. It must be a peril 'of' the sea. Not every loss or damage of which the sea is the immediate cause is covered by these words. They do not protect, for example, against that natural and inevitable action of the winds and waves which results in what may be described as wear and tear. There must be some casualty, something which could not be foreseen as one of the necessary incidents of the adventure. The purpose of the policy is to secure an indemnity against accidents which may happen, not against events which must happen. ... If a vessel strikes upon a sunken rock in fair weather and sinks, this is a loss by perils of the sea."