'憲法的 刑事訴訟'의 觀點에서 본 刑事節次上의 權利 및 制度 保障

曺國 울산대학교 사회과학연구소 2000 사회과학논집 Vol.10 No.1

'헌법적 형사소송'의 구현이 현 시기 우리 형사소송법학의 과제라고 할 때, 형사소송법학의 여러 쟁점을 논의하는데 있어서 우리는 1987년 헌법개정이 무엇을 형사소송법학에 요구하고 있는가를 분명히 하는데서 출발해야 한다. 이 글은 형사피의자 ㆍ 피고인의 형사절차상의 인권과 관련된 형사소송법적 문제를 크게 세 가지로 나누어 살펴 본다. 첫째, 헌법이 '적정절차'의 이념을 형사절차의 지도이념으로 선언하였다는 것의 실천적 함의가 무엇인가를 확인한다. 둘째, 헌법 제27조 4항에 규정된 '무죄추정의 원칙'의 의미를 정리하면서 현재 우리 형사절차에서 이 원칙은 어떠한 상태에 있는가를 검토한다. 셋째 이상 두 가지 원칙의 구체적 실현태인 헌법 제12조가 상세히 규정하고 있는 형사피의자 ㆍ 피고인의 형사절차상의 인권의 의미와 현황을 점검한다. 넷째 헌법상 기본권으로 선언되지 않았으나 헌법에서 요청하고 있는 형사절차상의 제도보장을 위하여 무엇이 필요한가에 대하여 의견을 제시 한다. The new 1987 Constitution brought a significant change in the theory and practice of the Korean criminal procedure. Explicitly stipulating the idea of due process in criminal procedure, the Bill of Rights in the Constitution has become a "living document." The 1988 and 1995 amendments to the Korean Criminal Procedure Code have also strengthened the procedural rights of criminal suspects and defendants to some degree. The newly established Korean Constitutional Court and the Korean Supreme Court have made important decisions for such rights. However, there still remain a number of problems which disturb the trim in the Constitution and overshadows the constitutional procedural rights. Police practices of avoiding the warrant requirements for arrest and search-and-seizure have continued. Guarantees of procedural rights for criminal suspects in police interrogation still remain incomplete and fragile. Investigators enjoy their dominant role in the criminal procedure, while citizens are treated merely as an object of the investigation. The judiciary is very reluctant to exclude the illegally obtained physical evidence in a trial.

‘공인’ 대상 사실적시 명예훼손 및 모욕의 비범죄화

조국 한국형사정책학회 2013 한국형사정책학회 학술대회 논문집 Vol.2013 No.4

‘憲法的 刑事訴訟’의 觀點에서 본 刑事節次上의 權利 및 保障

조국 동국대학교 비교법문화연구원 2000 比較法硏究 Vol.1 No.-

위법수집증거배제법칙 재론

조국 사법발전재단 2008 사법 Vol.1 No.3

In 2007 the National Assembly revised the Criminal Procedure Code to stipulate Article 308-2 for the exclusion of illegally obtained evidence, which is effective as of January 1, 2008. It reads: "The evidence obtained not by due process of law shall be excluded." On November 15, 2008 the Korean Supreme Court made a landmark decision to exclude illegally obtained physical evidence. Before the decision, the Court had consistently declined to exclude the physical evidence obtained by illegal search-and-seizure, whereas it has excluded involuntary confessions made under torture, battery, threat, deceit or after prolonged custody and confessions obtained in violation of the defendant's right to remain silent or right to counsel although they are disclosed voluntary. The revision of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Supreme Court's new decision show both the National Assembly and the Supreme Court recognize there are no other effective remedies for illegal police misconduct in search-and-seizure. First, this paper reviews the debate made in the Presidential Committee on the Judicial Reform: how to stipulate the exclusionary rule. Second, it examines the status and extent of Article 308-2 in the Criminal Procedure Code. It will argue, Article 308-2 is a general provision for other exclusionary rules such as Article 309 of the Code for confession rule and Article 4 of the Communication Privacy Protection Act to exclude the communication obtained by illegal wiretapping. Third, this paper analyzes the 2007 Supreme Court decision, which adopts discretionary rule, not mandatory rule. It finally highlights the difference between the majority opinion and the dissenting opinion regarding the standard of exclusion. 형사소송법 제308조의2의 신설과 2007년 11월 15일자 대법원 전원합의체 판결은 한국 위법수집증거배제법칙의 지평을 변화시켰다. 신설된 제308조의2는 단지 비진술증거에 대한 증거능력 배제를 위한 조문만은 아니다. 동조는 진술증거와 비진술증거 모두에 걸쳐 그 수집과정이 적법한 절차에 따르지 않은 경우 증거능력이 배제된다는 점을 선언하는 규정이다. 따라서 제308조의2는 위법하게 수집된 비진술증거의 증거능력에 대한 입법의 공백을 메우는 조문임과 동시에, 제309조와 통신비밀보호법 제4조 등 위법수집증거배제를 규정하는 여러 조문들의 일반조항으로서의 성격을 갖는다. 그리고 기존의 ‘성질ㆍ형상 불변론’을 폐기하고 위법수집증거배제법칙을 비진술증거인 증거물에까지 확대한 전원합의체 판결은 향후 수사기관의 불법한 대물적 강제처분을 억지(抑止)하여 헌법상 영장주의의 정신을 강화ㆍ심화하는 전환점이 될 것이고, 또한 형사소송법 제308조의2를 적용하는 해석지침을 제공하였다는 점에서 중요한 의미가 있다. 특히 위법한 대물적 강제처분으로 수집한 비진술증거의 증거능력도 원칙적으로 배제할 것이고, ‘독수과실의 원칙’도 수용하겠다고 선언한 점은 이후 한국 형사사법의 실무에 중대한 변화를 일으킬 것이다.

초·중·고등학교 교원의 정치활동의 범죄화 비판

조국 한국형사정책학회 2012 刑事政策 Vol.24 No.2

Under the current Korean law, unlike university/college professors, elementary/middle/high school teachers are not allowed to join a political party and engage in collective political activities including political campaigns for or against a political party during election period. Although the Korean Teachers and Education Union [KTU] received official recognition in 1999, it is not also permitted to engage in any political activity. The teachers who have breached this prohibition are given criminal sanction as well as administrative sanction. The Constitutional Court of Korea decided such criminalization of the politically active teachers is constitutional because; education must be separated from politics and teachers must be politically neutral; minors are immature unlike college students, so easily influenced by political activities of teachers; the students' right to class may be infringed by political activities of teachers. The Court also held that the criminal prohibition does not violate the constitutional principle of equality before law in that major tasks of teachers are teaching while those of professors are academic research. In cases where teachers collectively announced political declarations to criticize governments' policies in 2004 and 2009, the Supreme Court of Korea quashed the lower courts' judgements and held that the teachers violated political neutrality with intention to establish anti-government political front. This Article starts with a review of the OECD countries' law and international norm regarding teachers' engagement in political activities. It proceeds to criticize the judgements of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. It finally argues that current law regarding teachers' political activities excessively restricts teachers' political rights, therefore unconstitutional. Until the revision of the law, the law should be interpreted in a limited way to respect teachers' political rights.

독수과실의 원리

조국 한국형사판례연구회 2009 刑事判例硏究 Vol.17 No.-

On November 15, 2008 the Korean Supreme Court made a landmark decision to exclude illegally obtained physical evidence. It also adopted the “fruit of poisonous tree" doctrine, which excludes the derivative evidence obtained through the first tainted evidence. This Article reviews the Supreme Court's two decisions that applied the “fruit of poisonous tree" doctrine. First, the Decision of March 12, 2009 provides more specific standards to decide whether to exclude “tainted fruits." It requests comprehensive evaluation of all the circumstances regarding the collection of the first tainted evidence: the reasons and degree of process violation, the possibility of avoiding the violation, the causation between process violation and evidence collection, and the willfulness or negligence of law enforcement officers. Then, it does not exclude the physical evidence obtained without warning the suspect of the right to silence. This Article argues that the right to silence is the most crucial legal instrument to protect a suspect, particularly when the suspect is under interrogation without his/her counsel; it is a grave violation for a police officer not to warn a suspect of the right; in this case, exceptions of the “fruit of poisonous tree" doctrine are not applicable; so the physical evidence obtained without warning a suspect of the right to silence should be excluded. In the Decision of October 23, 2008 the Supreme Court held that the fingerprints on the illegally seized bottles and cups are admissible even if the seizure of the bottles and cups is illegal. This Article argues that such a view may weaken the constitutional request for warrant for search-and-seizure; the illegal seizure of the bottles and cups contaminates the evidentiary power of the fingerprints. In this case, however, the consent of the victim who is the owner of the bottles and cups is reasonably inferred, so the seized bottles and cups are admissible and the fingerprints on them are also admissible.

근대 시민혁명기의 민중적 형법사상에 관한 소고-베카리아와 마라를 중심으로-

조국 한국형사법학회 1992 刑事法硏究 Vol.5 No.-

특집:한미수교 110년, 조약을 통해 본 불평등의 역사 유린당한 주권·인권과 한미행정협정의 허구성

조국 역사문제연구소 1992 역사비평 Vol.- No.19

중국의 '개혁'과 형법 제정에 관한 연구 : 전환과 편향

조국 한양대학교 아태지역연구센터 1992 중소연구 Vol.16 No.4

Classification of 18F-Florbetaben Amyloid Brain PET Image using PCA-SVM

조국,김웅곤,강현,양경승,김현우,정지은,윤현진,정영진,강도영 대한의생명과학회 2019 Biomedical Science Letters Vol.25 No.1

Amyloid positron emission tomography (PET) allows early and accurate diagnosis in suspected cases of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and contributes to future treatment plans. In the present study, a method of implementing a diagnostic system to distinguish β-Amyloid (Aβ) positive from Aβ negative with objectiveness and accuracy was proposed using a machine learning approach, such as the Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and Support Vector Machine (SVM). 18F-Florbetaben (FBB) brain PET images were arranged in control and patients (total n = 176) with mild cognitive impairment and AD. An SVM was used to classify the slices of registered PET image using PET template, and a system was created to diagnose patients comprehensively from the output of the trained model. To compare the per-slice classification, the PCA-SVM model observing the whole brain (WB) region showed the highest performance (accuracy 92.38, specificity 92.87, sensitivity 92.87), followed by SVM with gray matter masking (GMM) (accuracy 92.22, specificity 92.13, sensitivity 92.28) for Aβ positivity. To compare according to per-subject classification, the PCA-SVM with WB also showed the highest performance (accuracy 89.21, specificity 71.67, sensitivity 98.28), followed by PCA-SVM with GMM (accuracy 85.80, specificity 61.67, sensitivity 98.28) for Aβ positivity. When comparing the area under curve (AUC), PCA-SVM with WB was the highest for per-slice classifiers (0.992), and the models except for SVM with WM were highest for the per-subject classifier (1.000). We can classify 18F-Florbetaben amyloid brain PET image for Aβ positivity using PCA-SVM model, with no additional effects on GMM.