전남 장성군 꿩 샤브샤브

서태경,Seo, Tae-Gyeong 한국건강관리협회 2005 건강소식 Vol.29 No.10

예부터 호남에서는 아무 음식점이나 들어가도 실패하지 않는다는 말이 있을 정도로 맛에 관한 한 다른 지역과의 비교를 불허한다. 그 중 백암산 줄기에 몸을 기대고 있는 장성군은 먹거리 뿐만 아니라 천년고찰인 백양사와 서원, 홍길동 유적지 등 다양한 볼거리를 갖춘 곳. 매년 봄에는 홍길동 축제가, 가을에는 백양단풍축제가 여행객들을 반긴다.

刑事訴訟法上 身體內部에 대한 强制搜査의 節次와 限界

서태경(Seo TaeKyung) 한양법학회 2008 漢陽法學 Vol.24 No.-

This thesis discusses the practicality of compulsory investigation procedures in relation to internal body searches conducted by the criminal investigation institution under the current Criminal Procedure Law(CPL). It will focus on the representative typical cases of (1) X-ray examination identifying the features of internal body (2) compulsory sampling of urine or blood (3) forced outlets of objects in a throat, etc. Current criminal procedure law doesn’t clearly stipulate the compulsory investigation methods mentioned above. Therefore, this paper addresses the priority for the protection of the human rights in light of cases where serious infringement to the personal human rights has occurred by the compulsory criminal investigation. Therefore, the compulsory measures outlined in points (1) and (2) above are made feasible by the examination permit requested by the prosecutor and issued by the judge under Articles of the Criminal Procedure Law 221-4. In addition, method (3) could be executed by the issuance of a search warrant under Article 215 in addition to examination permit according to Article 212-4. The above position could be presented based on the traditional view of discriminating the characteristic, subject and object of the compulsory disposition according to Article 109; internal body searches, Articles 140 and 141; full body searches, Article 173(I); body searches as well as considering the need for the protection of personal human rights. Thus, full body searches without a warrant should not be conducted by the compulsory criminal investigation in any given situation. In addition, an investigation institution can not independently carry out the compulsory examination even with the support of professionals such as medical doctors. This position contributes to the protection of personal human rights. This does however raise potential difficulties in applying the law to situations where there is need for urgent disposition of compulsory blood sampling without a warrant in drink driving cases. However, this problem needs to be addressed by the relevant legislation. Thus, the only practical necessity of compulsory blood sampling is not justified to be included under the scope of body searches described in the law.

응집에 의한 생물학적 처리수의 색도 및 난분해성 유기물 제거

서태경 ( Tae Kyeong Seo ),박상민 ( Sang Min Park ),박노백 ( Noh Back Park ),임지영 ( Jee Young Lim ),전항배 ( Hang Bae Jun ) 충북대학교 건설기술연구소 2008 建設技術論文集 Vol.27 No.1

연구논문 : 형사소송법 제106조 제3항 단서에 따른 수사기관의 압수에 관한 검토 - 피의자,변호인의 참여권을 중심으로 -

서태경 ( Tae Kyung Seo ) 단국대학교 법학연구소 2015 법학논총 Vol.39 No.3

The Criminal Procedure Law Article 106(3) defines as follows. ① When the object of seizure is computer disk, or other storage medium of similar digital information, Court should be offered in the form of a printed document or a copy of digital information only to prove the facts of suspicion. ② However, when it is acknowledged that such method is impossible or it seems hard to achieve the goal of seizure, the Court can confiscate the storage medium to save digital information. The Criminal Procedure Law Article 106(3) makes ① a principle, and then exceptively allows court to seize the storage medium. The legislative intent is that protecting the fundamental rights of the submitting person should be respected. When the execution of warrant by an investigative agency with a way of ②, generally an investigative agency acquires digital information to prove the facts of suspicion through several stage: (ⅰ) acquiring and moving storage medium from storage medium location to an office of an investigative agency or other external sites. (ⅱ) making image or logical copy of storage medium, (ⅲ) analysis(including search, recovery, etc), (ⅳ) acquiring digital informations to prove the facts of suspicion. In such cases, the most important two issues are: When the execution of warrant completed at step (ⅰ) or step (ⅳ)? Whether or not in the process of (ⅱ), (ⅲ), (ⅳ), an investigative agency should guarantee the right of continued involvement by persons subject to seizure or their counsel(The Criminal Procedure Law Article 219, 121, 122)? The Korean Supreme Court in its 2009 mo 1190 decision and 2011 mo 1839 decision clarified that the execution of warrant is completed at step (ⅳ) and an investigative agency must guarantee the right of continued involvement by persons subject to seizure or their counsel in the entire process, and prohibited the process of (ⅱ), (ⅲ), (ⅳ) by an investigative agency without the presence of those subject to seizure. Supreme Court’s intent may be to present guidelines to substantively guarantee a suspect’s right to informational self-determination and right of defense. But, on presents another view that the execution of warrant is completed at step (ⅰ), because The Criminal Procedure Law Article 106 says that storage medium to save digital information can be the object of seizure, and in the process of (ⅱ), (ⅲ), (ⅳ) by an investigative agency The Criminal Procedure Law Article 121(execution of warrant and presence of persons subject to seizure or their counsel) can not be applied after step (ⅰ) is completed. In this paper, I argue that in the process of (ⅱ), (ⅲ), (ⅳ) an investigative agency must guarantee the right of presence of persons subject to seizure or their counsel, to protect the fundamental rights of person subject to seizure, on the other hand, that the right of presence of persons subject to seizure or their counsel can be excluded when there is a probable cause, for example, interference with the investigatory process by such persons, in order to exercise legitimate state punishment power.

피고인의 진술녹음의 증거능력

서태경(Seo, Tae-Kyung) 한양법학회 2015 漢陽法學 Vol.26 No.4

In the criminal cases, the recording of defendant’s statements to threaten the victim or to confess his crime are often submitted as evidence to prove the charge in fact. However, it is important to disambiguate the admissibility of the recording medium because this issue implies some arguing points. It is acknowledged that hearsay rule should apply to the recording of statements, like written statements. Nevertheless, some critics do not agree with that the defendant"s confession recorded by the investigative agencies can be used to prove the facts constituting the crime charged. Also, regarding to the admissibility of the recording by individuals who are not he investigative agencies, there are several discrepancies among viewpoints. If the recording of the defendant"s statements to confess to the crime made by the investigative agencies satisfies the requirements of Criminal Procedure Act Article 312 paragraph (1)to (3), it may be admissible. However, in the light of CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT Article 312 paragraph (2), Article 381-2 paragraph (2) and ACT ON SPECIAL CASES CONCERNING THE PUNISHMENT, ETC. OF SEXUAL CRIMES Article 30 paragraph (6), ACT ON THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND JUVENILES AGAINST SEXUAL ABUSE Article 26 paragraph (6) the video-recorded product containing a defendant"s statement made by the investigative agencies is not admissible to prove the facts constituting the crime charged except for cases in which there are special regulations that allow a video-recorded product to use as proof of the facts constituting the crime charged. Therefore, the recording of the defendant‘s statements to confess to the crime made by the investigative agencies cannot be used to prove the facts constituting the crime charged, because the recording of defendant’s statement and the video-recorded product are similar in nature as a proof. On the other hand, in the case of individual recording, if it satisfies the requirements of CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT Article 313 paragraph (1), it may be used to prove the facts constituting the crime charged. In other words, if it is proven to be genuine by the acceptance of the defendant at a preparatory hearing or during a public trial, such recording medium is admissible. When it cannot be proven by the statement of the defendant at a preparatory hearing or during a public trial, for it"s being admissible, it should be proven to be genuine by the statement of the individual, who recorded the statement of the defendant, at a preparatory hearing or during a public trial and, if it goes to prove that the defendant"s statement was made in a particularly reliable state.

비상상고(非常上告)의 사유(事由)인 법령위반(法令違反)에 대한 소고(小考) : "판결(判決)의 법령위반(法令違反)"과 "소송절차(訴訟節次)의 법령위반(法令違反)"의 구별(區別)을 중심(中心)으로

서태경 ( Tae Kyung Seo ) 한양대학교 법학연구소 2009 법학논총 Vol.26 No.2

When it has been discovered after a judgement hans become binding that the trial or judgement of the case was in violation of Act and subordinate statues, the Prosecutor General may lodge an extraordinary appeal in the Supreme Court(Article 441 in criminal procedure act). And when an extraordinary appeal is considered to be well-grounded, a judgement shall be rendered according to the following categories. (1)When the original judgement is in violation of Act and subordinate statues, the part in violation shall be quashed; Provided that if the judgement was disadvantageous to the defendant, it shall be quashed a judgement rendered anew in the case. (2)When any procedure of the original judgement is in violation Acts and subordinate statues, the procedure in violation shall be quashed(Article 446 in criminal procedure act). According to Article 441 and 446 in criminal procedure act, extraordinary appeal is for purpose of correcting of Acts and the relief of the defendant in a an irrevocable judgment. Generally, between two roles of extraordinary appeal, correcting of Acts is received as a main role, and the relief of the defendant as a subordinate role. But the relief of the defendant must be judged as important as correcting of Acts. And the role of extraordinary appeal as the relief of the defendant must be strengthened. For strengthening the role of extraordinary appeal as the relief of the defendant, the application of the proviso of clause (1) of Article 446 in criminal procedure act must be extended farther. There for, the phrase "when the original judgement is in violation of Act and subordinate statues" have to be read as the meaning that violation of Acts and subordinate statues in the original judgement is possible to resulted a judgement which is disadvantageous to the defendant.

납입가장행위에 대한 형사책임

서태경(Seo Tae Kyung) 한양법학회 2007 漢陽法學 Vol.21 No.-

During the time period of establishing enterprises or issuing new stocks, the crimes of disguising the payment for the subscription price have been widespread these days. Committing of an act of disguising the payment is keenly against the principle of faithful capital and is very likely to affect much damage to stock transferees or involved creditors. This article mainly researches about the effects of the disguised payment and what kind of criminal liabilities according to the process of committing of relevant acts can be applied under the current laws. According to the Supreme court decision, the disguised payment for the subscription price is basically valid. It constitutes the crimes of disguised payment under the Commercial Law, forgery of public documents and consummated exercise of forged public documents under the Criminal Law. On the other hand, Supreme court doesn’t agree to the crime of business embezzlement or business misappropriation harming the interests of shareholders or enterprises. However, the Supreme court’s views on some points can not reasonably be agreeable. The basic view on the disguised payment for the subscription price should be invalid. Thus, criminal liability can be applied to the crimes of disguised payment under the Commercial Law, forgery of public documents and consummated exercise of forged public documents under the Criminal Law. But, it is more reasonable to keep the position not appling the crime of business embezzlement or business misappropriation harming the interests of shareholders or enterprises.

사법 : 주주(株主)의 간접손해(間接損害)에 대한 이사(理事)의 손해배상책임(損害賠償責任)

서태경 ( Tae Kyung Seo ) 한양대학교 법학연구소 2007 법학논총 Vol.24 No.3

화학적 응집을 이용한 생물학적 돈분폐수 처리수의 색도제거

서태경 ( Tae Kyeong Seo ),박노백 ( Noh Back Park ),최우영 ( Woo Young Choi ),이준상 ( Jun Sang Lee ),전항배 ( Hang Bae Jun ) 한국물환경학회 ( 구 한국수질보전학회 ) 2008 공동 추계학술발표회 Vol.2008 No.-

공법 : 탄핵증거(彈劾證據)로 사용(使用)할 수 있는 증거(證據)의 범위(範圍)에 대한 소고(小考)

서태경 ( Tae Kyung Seo ) 한양대학교 법학연구소 2009 법학논총 Vol.26 No.1

The system of the impeachment evidence was originated from the Anglo-American Law. The impeachment evidence prescribed in the article 318-2 of Korean Criminal Procedure Code. The impeachment evidence means the evidence used to decrease the provable power of the statement of the witnesses or the accused. And a hearsay evidence can be used as a impeachment evidence. There are five main evidences used to decrease a witness`s credibility. The first is the evidence showing self contradiction statement of witness. The second is the evidence showing that the witness is partial. The third is evidence showing witness`s character. The fourth is the evidence showing a defect of the witness`s capacity to observe, remember, or recount the matters testified about. The fifth is the evidence showing specific contradiction, in other words proof by the witness. There are many arguments regarding the impeachment evidence. First of all, argument on the permitted limit of impeachment evidence is very important. About this argument, there are four theories. That is, (1) evidences showing self contradiction statement of witness are only permitted to produce as a impeachment evidence, (2) evidences are permitted to produce as a impeachment evidence, which show self contradiction statement of witness, witness`s unwarranted prejudice, character, capacity to observe, remember etc. (3) all evidences are permitted to produce as a impeachment evidence without limit, (4) a prosecutor is only permitted to produce evidences showing self contradiction statement of witness as a impeachment evidence, but a accused is permitted to produce all evidences as a impeachment evidence without limit. For the harmony of the principle of the truthfinding function of the process and due process of law, and introduction of the trial by jury, I am sure that the first theory is reasonable.