• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.167-172
• /
• 2012

There is no substantive enactment in our country to regulate testifier's false statement in the process of investigation under current law. In consideration of such investigation reality, there exist predominant view that the regulations against testifier's untrue statement are necessary to fine actual truth on criminal justice. However, such view is not quite agreeable, for it holds a probability that excessive investigation rights might cause infringement on personal rights. It's because of human rights protection that the criminal justice puts before the finding of actual truth as its biggest principle, and as we see above, any testifiers' untrue statement are already punishable, although restrictive, through interpretation of deceptive scheme under current law such as obstruction of justice, crimes of sheltering or flying a criminal or calumny.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.11 no.12
• /
• pp.734-741
• /
• 2011

The beginning that the 'Obstruction of Justice' in the United States is commonly known to Korea is through the impeachment of former president W. J. Clinton in 1998. The 'Obstruction of Justice' in the federal law of the United States is comprehensively provided with a general and a particular rule laying emphasis on the obstruction of legal judiciary proceedings. But, according to the Korean Criminal Act and court decisions, there are no such system like the 'Obstruction of Justice' in the United States. In this result, in terms of the criminal-judicial system, some cases even telling a lies has more benefits than revealing the truth and it is discouraged to cooperate the achievement of judicial justice, which make difficulties in investigation and realizing real truth. For this reason, the Ministry of Justice in Korea makes efforts to introduce the 'Obstruction of Justice'. Nevertheless we should examine from all angles that the introduction of 'Obstruction of Justice' is indeed the alternative in our circumstances. Most of the discussions on the introduction of 'Obstruction of Justice' and also the revised bill of the Ministry of Justice are questions of 'False Statement of Suspect and Witness' for investigation of investigative agency, rather than for the introduction of a general rule on the 'Obstruction of Justice'. The introduction of 'False Statement of Suspect and Witness' for investigation of investigative agency needs to consider concern about human rights infringement and witness protection system should be reinforced in the first place. In other words, the introduction of 'False Statement of Suspect and Witness' for investigation process of investigative agency is undesirable now.

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.43
• /
• pp.43-70
• /
• 2015

The value and validity of elite oral materials have been questioned because of their gaps with 'fact'. The purpose of this article is to analyze these gaps and to propose some solutions that can reduce the gaps. According to the analysis of this article, there are three types of the gaps that qualitatively differ from each other. The first type of the gaps is produced in the process of generation of memory. This type is made because informants cognize and memorize the facts that exist outside themselves. Selective cognition, selective memory and individual experience come under this category. The second type is produced in the process of preserving the memory. Forgetting and memory transformation are main examples of this type. The third type is produced in the process of the interviews with the informants. False statements or lies fall into this category. The main conclusions are as follows. 1) all gaps in oral materials are not necessarily negative. It is because Some of these gaps- the first and the second type- are not only parts of the real world but also very useful for interpreting the world. 2) The third type of the gaps are very harmful and it is need to be eradicated or reduced. For this, this article proposes some solutions.

• Korean Journal of Forensic Psychology
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.211-239
• /
• 2020

This study examined characteristics and judges' judgments regarding sexual violence cases against individuals with intellectual disabilities by analyzing total 716 cases of court decision. Of 716 cases, 6.0% sentenced not guilty, 53.5% imprisonment, 36.7% suspended sentence. More than half of the victims had experienced sexual assault more than one time with the tendency of repeating being higher when the accused were relatives or acquaintances to the victims. In half of the total cases, the victims were not able to specify the time of incidents. Only in 20% of the cases, there was actual compulsion but in the remaining cases, there was no clear coercion used during the crimes. There are three issues regarding court's decision of sexual assault case against individuals with intellectually disabilities; (1) credibility of victims' statement, (2) inability of resist during the crimes, and (3) whether the accused were aware of the victims's disabilities. In the judgment of credibility of statement, consistency of statement was the criterion that was used most frequently, being followed by specificity of statement, motivation for false accusation, cognitive capacity of victim, and reports of statement validity analysis in the order. The most frequently used criterion of inability to resist was the victim's statement and attitude, followed by the statement and attitude of the accused, the victim's knowledge and understanding of sexuality in the order. Regarding to the awareness of disabilities on the part of the accused, the statement and attitude of the accused was most frequently used, the victims' communicative abilities, duration of relationship, and daily life competence in the order. There were no differences in the rulings and issues according to levels of disabilities and gender. When victims were under 13 credibility of statement became more argues but the awareness of disabilities less frequently than the cases of victims who were 13 or older.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.47-73
• /
• 2017

Medical certificate is a document to demonstrate a patient's health status, made up and signed by a physician, dentist, or oriental physician who attended the patient. It serves as an evidence in many official process including civil or criminal law suit, especially for one's personal injury. The Korean legal system also acknowledges and protects the evidentiary function of medical certificate by mandating physicians etc. to issue medical certificate in good faith and only when they personally attended the patient, and by criminally punishing them when they do not comply with these legal requirements. There are some reasons, however, that medical certificates often do not reflect the true health status of the patient: When physicians attend the patient and collect information regarding the health status of the patient, their priority is and should be the most cost-effective way to meet the health needs of the patient. It does not necessarily correspond to the accurate examination of the health status of the patient. Even when the patient's report on the history of the illness or the injury seems suspicious, physicians might have to avoid disproving it because that kind of attitude might harm the rapport between the physician and the patient. All these can distort the perception of the physicians and this distortion can be reproduced in the medical certificate they made up. Some of these problems might be resolved or at least enhanced by introducing new form of medical certificate which would guide physicians to reveal the nature, factual and theoretical grounds, and the limit of their findings more accurately. Others, however, would not be able to address, because it stems from the conflict between the physician's primary duty, duty to be loyal to the patient's life and health, and his secondary duty to serve as a public or neutral witness on the health status of the patient, and when both values or duties conflict with each other, they should choose the duty to the patient sacrificing the duty to the public or the court.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.33
• /
• pp.197-228
• /
• 2012

The private security industry in Korea has rapidly proliferated. While the industry has grown quickly, though, private security officers have recently been implicated in incidents involving violence, demonstrating an urgent need for systematic reform and regulation of private security practices in Korea. Due to its quasi-public service character, the industry also risks losing the public's favor if it is not quickly disciplined and brought under legitimate government regulation: the industry needs professional standards for conduct and qualification for employment of security officers. This paper shares insights for the reform of the Korean private security industry through a study of the licensing and training requirements for private security businesses in the United States, mainly focusing on the Private Security Officer Employment Authorization Act (hereinafter the PSOEAA) and the California system. According to the PSOEAA, aspiring security officers shall submit to a criminal background check (a check of the applicants' criminal records). Applicants' criminal records should include not only felony convictions but also any other moral turpitude offenses (involving dishonesty, false statement, and information on pending cases). The PSOEAA also allows businesses to do background checks of their employees every twelve months, enabling the employers to make sure that their employees remain qualified for their security jobs during their employment. It also must be mentioned that the state of California, for effective management of its private security sector, has established a professional government authority, the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services, a tacit recognition that the private security industry needs to be thoroughly, professionally, and actively managed by a professional government authority. The American system provides a workable model for the Korean private security industry. First, this paper argues that the Korean private security industry should implement a more strict criminal background check system similar to that required by the PSOEAA. Second, it recommends that an independent professional government authority be established to oversee and enforce regulation of Korea's private security industry. Finally, this article suggests that education and training course be implemented to provide both diverse training as well as specialization and phasing.