http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
宋廣燮 圓光大學校 1991 論文集 Vol.25 No.1
In this paper, it is described about the testimonial impeachment. This study is composed as follows. Ⅰ. Introduction Ⅱ. Conception of Testimonial Impeachment. Ⅲ. Intent of the Legislative and History. Ⅳ. The Property of Testimonial Impeachment System. Ⅴ. The permitted Limit of Testimonial Impeachment System. Ⅵ. The Subject and Limits of Impeachment. Ⅶ. Presentation and Investigation Method of Testimonial Impeachment. Ⅷ. Connected Matters to Testimonial Impeachment. Ⅸ. Conclusion Provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law about the Testimonial Impeachment Find as Follows; ARTICLE 318-Ⅱ, ARTICLE 312, ARTICLE 315, ARTICLE 316. Evidence means the material in general used as the ground for approval of facts. However, its meaning is used in many ways. Namely, it implies Means of Evidence, Corroborative Facts, cause or Evidence, Admissibility of Evidence, provable power, etc……. In general, it's used as Means of Evidence which means concrets objects the judicial officers can inquire by means of the action of the five sensory organs, and as corroborative facts which means the material for the approval of the facts which is supplied by means of the Means of Evidence. Testimonial impeachment means the evidence used to dispute the provable power of the statement of the witnesses, and is generally called as "Evidence for the dispute of the provable power of the statement." Testimonial impeachment system is the one originally adopted in the Englo-American Law. Under the Englo-American Law the provable power is strictly restricted with the institutional background or jury system, and for the purpose that uncertain of incorrect evidence form the viewpoint of the protection of human rights should not be manifested in the court, while Testimonial Inpeachment System aiming at reducing the credivility of the witnesses in accordance with the request for reflection of the strict restriction of the admissibility of evidence and for re-appreciation of the value of evidence has been developed, and such development has been made on the basis of the self-contradiction of the witnesses. The testimonial impeachment system of our country and that of Japan were adopted from the one in the Englo-American Law.
宋廣燮 圓光大學校大學院 1990 論文集 Vol.5 No.-
The Criminal Procedure Code doesn's pursuit only truth to inclination of Criminal punishment, ask the Public Procedure, which is Due Process. The problem of harmony doesn't solve the conflict between voluntary search and the idea of safeguarding human rights in Criminal Justice. This important problem is widely discussed. Fragmentary and Superficial approachment is not problem solution of systematic, more synthesis and inclusive studies. Magna Charta to Due Process of law brought to birth of Due Process of law in Criminal Procedure with Revelation of the Princinple of Legality which restraint to motion of penalty himself of a King. This paper intends to be superior due process which is the fair process in the constitution to the principle of material truth which is the fundamental idea in the Criminal Procedure Law, on the basis of article 12 in the constitution. This paper aims to study a basic principle and the necessity of amendment through changes of the Criminal Procedure Law. Assuming that the criminal procedure law is a procedural law executing concretly criminal law, the principle of legalitly that is a fundamental principle of criminal law means only "no punishment whthout law", and in this care, law is a formal law and has to be reasonable democratic and justice law. I suggest that the principle of legality should be added by clearness of penalty clause and appropriation of penalty contents on account of clearness of law and material doctrine of due process. The criminal procedure should be operated on the basis of due process idea and the principle out of court, bearing a opinion of judge.