• Proceedings of the Korea Contents Association Conference
• /
• 2012.05a
• /
• pp.89-90
• /
• 2012

피의자신문시 변호인이 참여할 수 있도록 명문 규정을 둔 2007년 형사소송법 개정은 진일보한 개정이라 할 수 있다. 그러나, 피의자신문시 변호인 참여 제도는 현재까지도 제대로 활성화되지 못하고 있는 실정이다. 이 제도를 활성화하기 위해서는 첫째, 피의자에게 국선변호권이 확대되어야 할 것이다. 둘째, '검사의 사법경찰관리에 대한 수사지휘 및 사법경찰관리의 수사준칙에 관한 규정'의 문제점이 개정되어야 할 것이다. 셋째, 수사기관에 대한 교육이 강화되고 변호인에게 수사 일정 등 통지가 제도화 되어야 할 것이다. 이러한 대책을 통해 피의자신문시 변호인 참여 제도가 활겅화되어야 피의자의 인권이 제대로 보장될 것이다.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.35 no.1
• /
• pp.137-146
• /
• 2013

This paper outlines the findings of a model of plea bargaining with multiple defendants, in which a prosecutor makes plea offer sequentially. It is shown that plea discount can be minimized with sequential offers and that not all of defendants shall be induced to plead guilty. By allowing sequential offer, a prosecutor has more power in the plea bargaining, which may increase social welfare by giving appropriate level of punishment to the guilty.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.12 no.7
• /
• pp.156-168
• /
• 2012

As the increase of violent crimes such as robbery, murder, and rape has become a social problem, the government is considering institutionalizing the identification of criminals to prevent crime and to guarantee people's right to know. Such an atmosphere led to the approval of the revision of 'Special Law On the Punishment of Specific violent Crimes' in the National Assembly in April 2010. The revision allows the revelation of the profiles of crime suspects including the pictures of their faces at the investigation stage. However, whether the revision had been effective in preventing crime has not been demonstrated empirically. Moreover, identity revelation is a grave intrusion into privacy and an abuse of human rights such as personal rights and the right to a fair trial, since personal information of criminal suspects would be released to the media prior to the court's final judgements. Also it violates the principle of presumption of innocence, the principles of due process, the principle of double jeopardy, the principle of prohibition against excessive, the principles of clarity, and the principle of liability.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.46
• /
• pp.113-140
• /
• 2016

Right to counsel means a defendant has a right to have the assistance of counsel (i.e., lawyers), and if the defendant cannot afford a lawyer, requires that the government appoint one or pay the defendant's legal expenses. The right to counsel is generally regarded as a constituent of the right to a fair trial. Historically, however, not all countries have always recognized the right to counsel. The right is often included in criminal law and constitutional law etc. First, any person who is arrested or detained shall have the right to prompt assistance of counsel. When a criminal defendant is unable to secure counsel by his own efforts, the State shall assign counsel for the defendant as prescribed by act in article 12(4) of the constitutional law. Second, the defense counsel or a person who desires to be a defense counsel may have an interview with the defendant or the suspect who is placed under physical restraint, deliver or receive any documents or things and have any doctor examine and treat the defendant or the suspect in article 34 of the criminal law. Nonetheless, problems about guarantee of the rights to counsel to the national security violators like spy terrorist and etc will be important for Koreans to consider. That is because national security violators's cases are qualitatively different from general criminal offense's cases and historically, lawyer obstruct a investigation in the process of examination of a suspect for national security violators. Therefore, this study suggest a way that a restriction the rights to counsel with an attorney in cases of the national security violators. To this end, in this paper, I touch on restriction of right to counsel during interrogation in the England and Germany etc in comparison to that of Korea and review Korea's Supreme Court decision and Constitution Court decision to understand the prospective and trends for Korean investigation procedure improvement.

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Information Security & Cryptology
• /
• v.20 no.6
• /
• pp.271-288
• /
• 2010

In this paper, we study the dysfunctions of cryptography as dual-use goods and national domestic encryption control policies like key recovery system and decryption order. And we examine risks of the breach of the peoples' constitutional rights like the right to privacy in these policies and analyze these policies by applying the principle of the ban on the over-restriction. Finally, we propose the direction and requirements of our national domestic encryption control policy that maintains the balance of peoples' constitutional rights and investigatory powers.

• Proceedings of KOSOMES biannual meeting
• /
• 2017.04a
• /
• pp.201-201
• /
• 2017

• Proceedings of the Korea Contents Association Conference
• /
• 2019.05a
• /
• pp.135-136
• /
• 2019

수사기관이 운영하는 포토라인이 피의자 망신주기용이며 헌법상 무죄추정의 원칙에 반하므로 없애야 한다는 주장과 국민의 알 권리를 위해 포토라인은 반드시 필요하다는 주장이 대립하고 있다. 포토라인의 문제를 헌법상 무죄추정의 원리와 알권리를 중심으로 합리적 해결방안을 모색해보고자 한다.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.7 no.12
• /
• pp.105-113
• /
• 2007

Company without voluntary agreement(nature) of police, violation on the reason of company, violation on identification state, Violations on duties to notify the party's family members and to allow the party have a chance to be notified. Violation on duty to notify the party to have the right to call an investigation authority, Violation on the time of company, Violation on the place of company, and Violation on using force such as compulsory during the process of voluntary company in state of illegal voluntary company. It also has to decide whether the evidences are illegal and eliminated by these two requisites even in probative value and evidence admissibility on confession of the party under the illegal voluntary company.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.13
• /
• pp.47-70
• /
• 2007

The criminal procedure is based upon two ideal values, or 'speedy trial and economy of litigation' and 'finding truth and guarantee of human rights', which are conflicting each other. The so called summary trial system, a simplified procedure through which a judge handles clearly obvious and minor offences in a quick and efficient manner, has its essential purpose of termination lawsuits promptly and freeing suspects or defendants from criminal procedure at the earliest possible moment. But its excessive emphasis on this purport is very likely to result in insufficient examination and inadequate protection of suspects' or defendants' rights. Therefore, the summary trial system needs a variety of safeguards to prevent these feasible - but undesirable - effects. From this point of view, we should objectively review the current summary trial system. The main object of this study is to investigate what problems the system has both in institution and in practice, and to suggest legal measures, including the abolition of it, to improve the simplified procedure. In conclusion, the summary trial system should be maintained because it has still more merits than faults. And these defects will be able to be overcome by reform measures ; for example, the introduction of the right to opt between the summary procedure and the formal trial, the abolition of detention and so on.

• The Journal of the Convergence on Culture Technology
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.127-137
• /
• 2019

In this study, I set the allowable range of viewing / copying rights of investigation records on criminal victims and bereaved families in the procedure of investigation. I tried to grasp the contents of the suspect's statement at an early stage and support it in order to cope appropriately Recently, the social consideration of people suffering from crime victims is expanding in fact. The scope of the investigation is set by the lawyer of the suspect in relation to the subordinate statute concerning the investigation and reading of the investigation record. In parallel, it is necessary to apply to the victim's lawyer or bereaved. This is a part that coincides with the purpose of certifying private rights such as browsing of litigation records to the victim and ultimately has a purpose related to the allowable range. Although it is the right to receive the investigation result at each stage, it is not used properly. Especially when distorted investigation progresses, if the suspect is not prosecuted, the victim may be in a state of regret. The important part can be summarized as the question of whether the investigation of the victim's lawyer is allowed to view and access the criminal records. This section has been reviewed with a focus on the current Act and its functional aspects should be emphasized and revised in accordance with the legal environment. These findings will contribute to ensuring victims' rights in the future. It is also used as an important resource in the legislative process, including the revision of the criminal procedure law.