경찰관직무집행법상 불심검문

구형근(Gu Hyung-Keun) 한국토지공법학회 2008 土地公法硏究 Vol.39 No.-

  The necessity and importance of the use of police authority are growing more and more in highly dangerous society of these days. Moreover, the danger related to the police, unlike in the past, causes significant damages to the benefit and protection of the law in nation and society, individual. Therefore, it needs to keep going concretely and efficiently to the prevention of danger in the police law.<BR>  In these days, random questioning acts as measures to prevent danger, especially to prevent the crime, most efficiently in the police operation, and takes a front seat by prevention of a crime and predetection and interception of a crime.<BR>  But regretably, random questioning is one of the compulsory measures used by national authorities and it is regarded as top priority to control and restrain random questioning because of the violation of human rights and fundamental rights protected under constitutional law by abusing it. Therefore, it has been in frequent collision between the police and a nation because random questioning in practical affairs is in between the public power and the human rights.<BR>  For the public concern over the violation of human rights and the control of the police operation, by imposing the abstract legal requisites and the rigid procedural limits, it is also true that random questioning as measures of the police operation to prevent a crime is not in effect. As a result, it can lead to the higher expense and the lower efficiency in the public security and administration, and weigh with the job performance of the police officers on duty by falling the public power.<BR>  In case of regarding random questioning in the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police officers as the significant measures, it is no doubtfully important task to study the plan of raising the efficiency of random questioning. Despite the concerns about the violation of the rights caused by abusing act of the police power, but because of sufficient measures done by the control of the court such as accumulation of the precedent and limit theory of the police authorities, it must be done to prevent the benefit and protection of the law in nation and society, individual through the use of the police authorities.

해양경비법상 해상검문검색에 관한 연구

김재운 ( Jae Woon Kim ) 한국경찰법학회 2014 경찰법연구 Vol.12 No.1

The maritime police play a role to maintain the peace and order of the ocean in Korea by performing various duties such as maritime safety, prevention and investigation of maritime crimes, search and rescue missions of maritime disasters and prevention of marine pollution in wide areas of the ocean 4.5 times as wide as the land. The rights for boarding, questioning and searching by the maritime police in ships should be explicitly defined in the related Acts in order for the maritime police to lawfully perform their tasks. However, the maritime police have performed them without an explicit legal basis. In 2012, the maritime policing act including the provision of boarding, questioning and searching is enacted to ensure the legality for exercise of maritime police power. Officers having the jurisdiction over land have stopped a criminal suspect and asked questions by means of provision of police questioning in the existing performance of police functions act. However, because the provision of police questioning requires the agreement of subjects, there are many problems in the efficacy of law enforcement. But since there are many risks such as escaping by crossing the border or destroying evidence by throwing it away into the sea, the maritime policing act forcibly enforces the law by imposing a fine if subjects resist the boarding, questioning and searching such as stopping vessel boarding, questioning, and searching by the maritime police. In addition, if a threat is simply imposed on maritime safety without relevance to the crime, it enacts the provision for boarding, questioning and searching in the vessels with unstable navigational state or carrying WMD. But the right of maritime police prescribed by the provision of boarding, questioning and searching by the maritime police in the maritime policing act is miniscule compared to ‘at any time go on board of any vessel subject to … any law of the US’ prescribed by the 14 U.S. Code §89 (a) and ‘the ship is stopped to perform safety examinations or ask questions, if necessary’ prescribed by the Japan Coast Guard Act. Moreover, since we do not have regulations similar to ‘the officers of the Coast Guard … is deemed to be acting as agents of the particular executive department’ prescribed by the 14 U.S. Code §89 (b) and Japan Coast Guard Act 15, we have potential problems of not exercising legal enforcement rights for some acts. If this problem is improved, the maritime police can exercise legal enforcement more effectively in the ocean where potential high-risks are present compared to those in land.

경찰관직무집행법상 불심검문제도의 개정논의에 대한 비판적 고찰

이호중(Lee, Ho-Joong) 한국형사법학회 2009 형사법연구 Vol.21 No.3

This paper reviews the reform issues on police stop and questioning. Recently National Police Agency and some scholars raise worries that police questioning authority to prevent the public danger has more and more emasculated as the democracy has advanced in Korea. So they propose police questioning rules should be reformed toward enforcing the police authority of stop and questioning. The major reform suggestions are as followings. First, police questioning should be broadly executed broadly for 'prevention of danger', although the current law strictly limits the police questioning under the condition of criminal suspicion. Second, 'identification authority' should be introduced, and third, when the questioned person refuses the police request of identification, police officer has to be empowered to establish his(or her) identity by compulsion. These suggestions are based upon the concept that police activity to prevent danger and to maintain safety of the public should distinguished from the police activity for criminal investigation. However, I don't agree with these reform opinions and policies. The unspecified questioning under the abstract and comprehensive term 'prevention of public danger' easily justifies reckless police questioning practice and results in 'sweeping' questioning and identification without any reasonable doubt. I think, this policy violates due process and proportionality principle strictly required under Constitution. Moreover, if the compulsory identification process is introduced, it is clear that police questioning and identification practices infringe upon the fundamental rights of many people who has no reasonable relation to criminal act. On the whole, these policies have the tendency to enforce police power at the sacrifice of citizens' freedom and right of privacy, and constitutional principles of rule of law.

불심검문의 한계설정에 관한 고찰

이재방 ( Jae Bang Lee ) 홍익대학교 법학연구소 2012 홍익법학 Vol.13 No.4

Individual`s freedom and rights protected by the Constitution could be restricted only as long as measures taken to maintain public security, welfare, and law and order can not violate the essential part of the freedom and rights. To protect social peace and to arrest a suspect effectively, specific and objective measures should be introduced, which leads to ensure legitimacy of police conduct for crime prevention and detection in the pre-stage of investigation In this context, the provision of police questioning in ``the Act on the performance of duties by police officers`` states : (1) that a police officer can stop and question a suspect if there is probable cause that the suspect committed the crime or are intending to commit it under reasonably considering the suspicious actions or surrounding circumstances; (2) that the officer can also stop an person who seemed to know the finished or committing crime; and (3) that in the course of questioning, the officer can search whether the suspect possess weapons. As for a police officer`s stop, the Supreme Court concluded that immediately after snatching, the police officer`s conducts to stop and block the movements of the persons who seemed to be similar features of the suspect in order to question are reasonable action with consideration of the degree of criminal seriousness, involvement of the crime, urgency of the situation, degree of suspicion, and needs of the questioning. Although the Court`s conclusion justifies the officer`s restrictive use of physical force such as movement interference, there have still been no objective standards for the suspicious persons who do not obey the police stop. Assuming the need of police questioning measures above mentioned, the paper deals the permissible standards for ``police questioning pursuant to the Act on the performance of duties by police officers`` in order to dispel worry of the violation of basic rights and to make effective police questioning, and then illuminates the successive measures for those who do not obey lawful stop and police questioning. Based upon this review and due process of law in the constitution, the paper suggests that more strict and objective standards for police stop should be established, and that restrictive detention by police officers could be allowed to those who do not obey police stop.

불심검문제도의 법률상 문제점과 개선방안

김효진(Kim, Hyo-Jin),정대권(Jung, Dae-Guon) 한국민간경비학회 2014 한국민간경비학회보 Vol.13 No.3

As one of the enforcement methods, "Police stop and question" is a system to prevent crimes and detect early, ruled in Law of Enforcement by police officers. Even though it can be fundamentally an arbitrary measure, police officers have performed much of their work through "Police stop and question". However, when it comes to "Police stop and question", many problems about legal and operational issues have been posed. Because of it, police officers have difficulty in conflicting with citizens while enforcing law. As the first stage of the meeting between citizens and police officers, "Police stop and question" functions as a criterion to estimate the justice of exercising of public power in the society, placing the interface between governmental authority and human rights. In other words, "Police stop and question" will need to be considered to have two objectives, which are the maintenance of the public order through prevention and suppression and guaranteeing human rights by legal process, at the same time. Theoretically, these two objectives are in a complementary relationship in terms of "Police stop and question", but they are in a strained relationship conflicting at the contact point in reality. In order to reconcile these two objectives, it is necessary to provide requirement, object and procedure of "Police stop and question" strictly by law. Moreover, the police officers who enforce the law have to make an effort to observe the law and put it in practice in the process of exercising public power. This paper tries to focus on grasping the legal character of "Police stop and question" in the second chapter, examining the procedure of "Police stop and question" theoretically in the third chapter, and suggesting the legal problem and improvement plan of "Police stop and question" in the fourth chapter. 한국의 경찰관직무집행법 제3조에 규정되어 있는 불심검문은 경찰의 직무집행수단의 하나로서 범죄를 예방하고 조기발견하기 위해 만들어진 제도로 본질적으로는 임의처분이라 할 수 있으나 현실적으로 경찰관들은 업무의 많은 부분을 불심검문을 통해 수행하고 있다. 그러나 불심검문에 대해서는 여러 가지 법적인 문제점과 운용상의 문제점이 제기되어 왔으며 이로 인해 경찰관들은 법집행 현장에서 시민들과 마찰 등 어려움을 겪고 있다. 불심검문은 '시민과 경찰의 만남'이 이루어지는 최초의 단계로서 공권력과 인권의 접점에 위치하여 그 사회의 공권력행사의 정당성을 가늠하는 척도로서의 기능을 갖는다고 할 수 있다. 즉 불심검문은 범죄의 예방과 진압을 통한 치안유지와 적법절차를 통한 인권보장이라고 하는 두 가지 목적을 동시에 지니고 있다고 보아야 할 것이다. 불심검문에 있어서의 이 두 가지 목적은 이론적으로는 상호보완적인 관계이지만, 현실에 있어서는 접점에서 서로 충돌하는 긴장관계에 놓여있다고 할 수 있다. 불심검문제도가 가지고 있는 이 두 가지 목적을 조화롭게 이루어내기 위해서는 법률로써 불심검문의 요건, 대상, 절차를 엄격히 규정할 필요가 있으며, 공권력을 행사하는 과정에서 법을 집행하는 경찰관의 준법의지와 실천적 노력이 요구된다. 이에 본 논문은 제2장에서 불심검문의 법적 성격을 파악하고 제3장에서 불심검문의 절차에 관한 이론적 검토를 한 후 제4장에서 불심검문의 법률상 문제점과 개선방안을 제시해 보고자 한다.

해상에서 경찰관직무집행법 적용의 한계에 관한 고찰: 경직법 제3조 불심검문을 중심으로

고명석,박주상 한국치안행정학회 2022 한국치안행정논집 Vol.19 No.4

As stipulated in the Coast Guard Act, Coast Guard exist to protect maritime sovereignty in the sea, establish marine safety and security (Article 1), maintain public well-being and order in the sea (Article 14 (2)), and prevent and respond to risks to public well-being in the sea (Article 14 (3)). In Articles 3 and 2 of the National Police and Self-Governing Police Act, the police also specify the scope of the police's duties, such as "protection of people's lives, bodies, and property," "prevention and suppression investigation of crimes," and "maintain public well-being and order. Coast Guard and land police will exercise police power for the national purpose of "maintaining public well-being and order," which is the purpose or duty of the police, only because the space or place of force exercise is different. Accordingly, as a general law for exercising police power, there is the Act on The Performance of Duties by Police Officers, Police Officer, which is based on both land police and Coast Guard. The Act stipulates the scope of police officers' duties (Article 2), sudden questioning (Article 3), protection measures (Article 4), prevention of risk (Article 5), prevention and restraint of crime (Article 7), access to prevent risk (Article 7), confirmation of facts (Article 8), and collection of information (Article 9). There is a big difference between sea and land in the physical environment in which police power is invoked. As a general basis for the exercise of police power, the Act on The Performance of Duties by Police Officers, Police Officer is applied to maritime sites as well. However, there are many limitations and practical restrictions in applying the Act on The Performance of Duties by Police Officers at sea. This is because the job performance space applying this law is not only created on the premise of an onshore environment, but is also designed to be applied by the individual national power of police officers when performing their duties. The invocation of police power at sea has no choice but to be carried out by means of vessels, and it is common to operate in units of ships such as police ships and counterparts rather than individual units of police officers. This is also remarkable in terms of institutional aspects such as maritime law regulations and practical aspects such as police action Among the means of police authority stipulated in the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers, sudden questioning is especially widely used at crime sites on land or rally sites, and is frequently used at sea. The sudden questioning is efficient from the perspective of police officers, but at the same time, it has a strong ambivalence that is likely to infringe on the basic rights of the people. The purpose of this study is to explore the procedures and methods of standard police disposition suitable for the maritime environment while protecting the rights and interests of the people at sea. To this end, we will examine the legal nature and contents of the sudden questioning, which is a representative standard disposition under the Act on The Performance of Duties by Police Officers. And we will examine whether police actions, such as sudden questioning designed on the premise of land, bring legal and factual limitations and restrictions at sea. As an improvement plan, I will propose an alternative to enacting (tentative name) the Act on The Performance of Duties by Police Officers at sea. 해양경찰은 「해양경찰법」에 규정된 것처럼, 해양주권을 수호하고 해양 안전과 치안을 확립하고(제1 조), 해양에서 공공의 안녕과 질서유지를 하며(제14조제2항), 해양에서 공공안녕에 대한 위험의 예방과 대응(제14조제3항)을 하기 위하여 존재하는 조직이다. 한편, 「국가경찰과 자치경찰의 조직 및 운영에 관한 법률」 제3조와 「경찰관직무집행법」 제2조에 경찰의 직무범위로서 ‘국민의 생명·신체 및 재산의 보호’ 나 ‘범죄의 예방·진압 수사’‘공공의 안녕과 질서유지’등을 명시하고 있다. 해양경찰과 육상경찰은 경찰력 행사의 공간이나 장소가 상이하지만, 경찰의 목적 또는 직무인 ‘공공의 안녕과 질서유지’라는 국가적 목적을 위해서 경찰권을 발동하게 되는 것은 같은 원리이다. 이에 따라 경찰권 발동에 대한 일반법으로서 육상경찰과 해양경찰이 모두 근거를 두고 있는 「경찰관직무집행법」이 있다. 동법에는 경찰관의 직무수행 범위(제2조), 불심검문(제3조), 보호조치(제4조), 위험 발생의 방지(제5조), 범죄의 예방과 제지(제6조), 위험 방지를 위한 출입(제7조), 사실의 확인(제8조), 정보의 수집 등(제9조)과 같이 경찰관이 직무수행을 할 때 필요한 일반적 직무내용을 규정하고 있다. 경찰권 발동의 일반적 근거로서 「경찰관직무집행법」은 육상뿐 아니라 해상 현장에서도 그대로 적용 하고 있다. 그런데 해상과 육상은 경찰권 발동의 물리적 환경에 있어 크게 차이가 난다. 그러므로 「경찰 관직무집행법」을 육상과 동일한 방식으로 해상에서 적용하는 데에는 많은 한계와 현실적인 제약이 따른 다. 동 법은 직무수행 공간이 육상 환경을 전제로 만들어졌을 뿐만 아니라, 경찰관이라는 개인 단위 국가 권력이 업무를 수행할 때 적용할 수 있도록 설계되어 있기 때문이다. 해상에서 경찰권의 발동은 함정을 수단으로 집행될 수 밖에 없으며, 경찰관 개인단위보다 경찰함정과 상대 선박 등 선박 단위로 활동하는 것이 일반적이다. 이점은 해사법규 등 제도적 측면이나 경찰작용 등 현실적 측면에서도 마찬가지다. 「경찰관직무집행법」에 규정된 경찰권의 수단 중에서 특히 불심검문은 실제 육상의 범죄 현장이나 집회 현장 등에서 광범위하게 활용되고 있으며, 해상에서도 빈번히 활용되고 있다. 불심검문은 경찰관 입장에서 효율적이지만, 동시에 국민의 기본권을 침해할 소지가 농후한 양면성을 가지고 있다. 이 연구는 해상에서 국민의 권익을 보호하면서도 해양 환경에 알맞은 경찰 표준처분의 절차와 방법을 탐색해보는데 목적이 있다. 이를 위해서 「경찰관직무집행법」상 대표적인 표준처분인 불심검문에 대하여 법적 성격, 내용을 살펴보겠다. 이어서 육상을 전제로 설계된 불심검문 등 경찰작용이 해상에서 어떻게 법적·사실적 한계와 제약을 가져오는지 검토해 보겠다. 나아가 이 연구의 개선방안으로서 (가칭)「해양경 찰관직무집행법」을 제정하는 대안을 제시해 보겠다.

인권보장을 위한 경찰관직무집행법상 불심검문에 관한 연구

이영우(Lee Youngwoo),박종렬(Park Jongryeol),견승엽(Kyen Seungyup) 한국법학회 2016 법학연구 Vol.62 No.-

경찰관직무집행법상 불심검문은 경찰 재량권의 행사와 피검문자 인권보장 사이에서 꾸준히 문제가 제기 되어 오고 있다. 최근에도 2015년 학생에게 세월호 사건을 애도하는 리본을 달았다는 이유로 경찰관이 불심검문을 하여 경찰권 남용, 인권침해 문제가 제기 되었다. 경찰권 행사는 다양한 상황에 따른 경찰관 개인의 판단이 필요한 특성상 재량권이 인정된다. 정지 대상자 선정에 관한 요건이 ‘수상한 거동’, ‘합리적인 판단’ 등 추상적 용어로 규정한 이유도 바로 이러한 이유이기도 하다. 재량권의 일탈 ․ 남용은 위법 ․ 부당의 문제를 야기시키기 때문에 재량기준을 공표하여 이를 통제되어야 하지만 경찰의 주관적 판단에 대한 기준을 설정하는 것은 실질적으로 거의 불가능하므로 경찰관 신분증 제시, 질문의 목적 고지, 임의동행 거부권 고지 등 행정절차를 통하여 이를 통제하고 있다. 본 논문은 불심검문과 인권 침해의 관계를 살펴보고자, 불심검문의 법적 성격에 대하여 고찰하고 최근 국가인권위원회의 결정과 법원 판결들을 분석하였다. 그 결과 정복경찰관의 신분증 미제시와 정지 불응 시 유형력 행사 문제가 가장 많이 발생 되었음을 알 수 있었다. 이에 대한 개선방안으로 첫째, 모든 경찰관은 정복을 입은 것과는 관계없이 신분증을 제시하도록 하고, 둘째, 정지 불응 시 유형력 행사는 범행의 경중, 범행과의 관련성, 상황의 긴박성, 혐의의 정도, 질문의 필요성 등에 비추어 목적 달성에 필요한 최소한의 범위 내에서 사회통념상 용인될 수 있는 상당한 방법 중 피검문자가 불심검문을 자유롭게 거부할 수 있을 정도의 심리 상태를 유지할 수 있어야 한다. 셋째, 기타 방안으로 불심검문 후 문제가 없을 시 경찰관은 그 즉시 사과를 하게 하거나, 경찰관과 피검문자가 녹취를 하게 하여 인권 침해 여부를 사후적으로 통제하는 방안을 제시하였다. The stop and question in Act on the performance of duties by police officers(so-called APDP) has been steadily brought up public could be generally considered to be potential criminals, even though the stop and question would have more effective sanction against questionable-but- potential outbreak of crimes in the aspect of crime prevention In 2015, It was heavily argued about the abuse of police authority and invasion of human rights casued by the stop and question of a police, performed on the base that a walking student attached a ribbon commemorating the Sewol ferry(the sorrowful incident of a cruiser called Sewolho sunk in the south sea). Under the article of the APDP by police officers, the police can be permitted to conduct discretionary authority of selecting the questioned in the condition of legally appropriate fulfillment, in the case the police performs the stop and question. However, the human rights invasion can be likely to be caused by miss of police discretionary authority, and therefore, there is due process the police must comply with ; not only presenting a certificate indication identification of the police, informing the purposes of question, but also notifying the rights that the questioned is eligible to refuse accompany to the police station, the patrol division, and substation as well in the event of legally proper performance of accompany. in order to make an observance of causal relationship between the stop-question and the human right invasion, I made a study of the legal nature of the stop and question, and then I made a deep analysis on the influential decisions recently made by National Human Rights Committee and the court precedents. Consequently, a large number of problematic cases are found to be realized in the event of the stop and question, of which the biggest cases are non-presentation of a policemans identity and limitation of the police force performance in the case of requiring a stop for a pedestrian. As a method to correct such the problematic cases in the better way, at first, the entire police must present the identification card, regardless of wearing the police uniform. Second, in the event of no response to requiring a stop, the activation of police enforcement, can be limitedly allowable, not only in the socially-accepted and reasonable way, but, also within the minimum range of police performance necessary to make an achievement, of the goal of the stop and question, in the light, of various criminal factors-seriousness, relevance, and emergency of crime and necessity of question, and so on. Lastly, lf it is questioned without an sensible reason, the questioning police is requested to extend an apology in the sincere and face-to-face way, and the human right invasion of the police performance or not can ve post-controlled through making a sound or video record of the stop and question happening between the police and the questioned.

경찰청에 대한 국정감사 질의내용 실증분석 -2003~2007년 질의내용을 중심으로-

민형동 ( Hyung Dong Min ) 한국경찰학회 2009 한국경찰학회보 Vol.11 No.4

Depending on how the administration functions and plays its role, the possibility of violation on the rights of citizen increases due to the abusing administration authority. Study on ways to control administration is necessary especially on area where the police`s administration control is much required than the other administration offices for its possibility of abusing the citizen`s rights and freedom is high in the process of performing their basic duties on public stability and maintenance order. Therefore, this research focused on using the Content Analysis analyzed on the question content on a stenographic record which is the police`s main outside intervention of Parliamentary inspection of the administration of National Assembly from year 2003 to 2007. After setting up the individual topic of the question content to analysis unit from Parliamentary Inspection on State Administration of each executive official of National Assembly, the research embodied the police duties with ten areas and twenty-seven types using the table “The direct enforcement regulations of its own unit and National Police Agency about the field and business area on the structure of the police” and the “An organization and system of National Police Agency”. The research analyzed and examined the difference of the question content between government party and non-government party and the field of police`s business. The research also investigated on the frequency which corresponds to Judicial Police with Administration Police as well as the frequency of the question content applicable to duties on “public” and “non-public”, measured on main recognition after investigating on the frequency order argued from the parliamentary inspection considering each administration safety committee, and abstracted Audit Control Barometer through use of these data. After analyzing the study, in National Assembly`s Parliamentary Inspection on State Administration on National Police Agency, the field of most frequent question was in the order of Police Planning Affairs, Criminal Investigation, and Life Safety. Police Planning Affairs argued mostly on human resource and its affairs and on its reform and planning field. Whereas, the comparison between government party and non-government party showed no differences on the number of the questions about each field and sphere, but had some numbers of dissimilarities on the question content. The government party emphasized on safety on public welfare, while the non-government party questioned frequently on system improvement and contents on political tendency. In the analysis on Audit Control Barometer, the value of Audit Control Barometer was high in the order of Police Planning Affairs, Criminal Investigation, Life Safety, and Traffic as shown on the frequency of question. Therefore, the National Assembly requires much more specific system of inspection enforcement, while National Police Agency necessitates on providing system of improvement and inspection defenses on this field and sphere.

경찰작용에 대한 법적 고찰 불심검문에서의 신원확인에 관한 법적 고찰

이영돈 ( Young Don Lee ) 한국경찰법학회 2015 경찰법연구 Vol.13 No.1

Police stop and question is the important authority for police officers to prevent crimes and arrest suspects. Police duties performance Act in korea states that a police officer can stop and question someone if the officer have probable cause to believe that a person has committed the crime or is intending to commit crime under surrounding circumstances. In recently, some people are likely to refuse to police officer’s request to stop and question. So, Police National Agency and some scholars have suggested that “stop and identify statutes” should be amended in Police duties performance Act in korea. “Stop and identify statutes” is law that authorize for police officers to request and obtain the identification of someone whom they reasonably suspect has committed a crime. However, it has been criticized to pose a potential danger to invade the individual rights such as privacy and the right to remain silent guaranteed by Korean Constitutional Law. This study examined foreign countries‘ laws related to stop and identify. Most major countries have enacted “stop and identify” statutes. For example, some states of United States have “Stop and identify laws that allow police to detain persons and request such persons to identify themselves, and arrest them if they refuse to identify themselves. Especially, Germany, France and Twain have the law permitting for police officers to request one’s identification card in case of emergency situations regardless of committing crime. In conclusion, Korean Police should try to recover people’s trust by obeying the due process of stop and question. Also, it is necessary to introduce “stop andidentify” statutes with systems to prevent people’s individual rights.

변경되는 경찰채용시험의 출제범위에 관한 연구 : 형사소송법 중심으로

정연균(Jung, Yeon Gyun) 한국공안행정학회 2021 한국공안행정학회보 Vol.30 No.3

The police officer recruitment test, especially the written test, for selecting excellent talents has been through numerous revisions since the enactment of the <Police Officer Appointment Ordinance> on January 9, 1969. In order to perform the duties of the police stipulated in Article 3 of the <Act on the Organization and Operation of National Police and Self-Governing Police>, it is said that selecting the right talent is the most important thing. There are written tests, physical fitness tests, and interview tests in the recruitment test. The written test will be completely reorganized and implemented from 2022. English and Korean history will be implemented as a test system, and police studies, criminal law, and constitutional subjects will consist of a written test. This study is a study on the changing scope of the Police Recruitment Test under this background. In particular, this study intends to discuss the scope of the <Criminal Procedure Act> subject, which evaluates criminal procedures that may infringe upon citizens fundamental rights. Prior to the change, the current <Criminal Procedure Law> subject covered the entire criminal procedure, that is, investigation-trial-execution, but in the changed police recruitment exam, what is limited to the criminal procedure part, that is, the investigation procedure part, in charge of the police is changed. It is the core of the scope of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Police Recruitment Test. This study will first look at the general part of the Police Recruitment Test, especially the Police Recruitment Test, which will be changed in 2022, and specifically mention the range of questions for each subject, especially the <Criminal Procedure Law> subject. This study analyzes the tendency of questions in the <Criminal Procedure Law> subject recently taken in the Police Recruitment Test, and suggests the range of questions in the <Criminal Procedure Law> subject suitable for the changing police recruitment exam. As it is a newly implemented subject reorganization, there may be many trials and errors, but I hope that this study will be of little help. 우수한 인재를 선발하기 위한 경찰공무원 채용시험, 특히 필기시험은 1969년 1월 9일에 근거규정인 <경찰공무원임용령> 제정 이후 수많은 개정을 거쳐 현재에 이르고 있다. <국가경찰과 자치경찰의 조직 및 운영에 관한 법률> 제3조에 규정된 경찰의 임무를 수행하기 위해서는 이에 맞는 인재를 선발하는 것이 무엇보다 중요하다고 할 것이다. 채용시험에는 필기시험, 체력시험, 면접시험이 있지만 경찰임무의 기본적 수행에 적합한 인재를 선발하는 것은 필기시험이라고 할 것이다. 필기시험은 2022년부터 전면 개편되어 시행될 예정인데 영어, 한국사는 검정제로 시행되고 경찰학, 형사법, 헌법과목은 필기시험으로 이루어질 예정이다. 본 연구는 이러한 배경하에 변경되는 경찰채용시험의 출제범위에 관한 연구로서 특히, 국민의 기본권 침해우려가 있는 형사절차를 평가하는 <형사소송법>과목의 출제범위에 대해 논의하고자 한다. 변경되기 전인 현행 <형사소송법>과목은 전체 형사소송절차 즉, 수사-공판-집행부분이 출제범위였는데 변경되는 경찰채용시험에서는 경찰이 담당하는 형사절차부분 즉, 수사절차부분에 한정되는 것이 변경되는 경찰채용시험의 형사소송법 출제범위의 핵심이다. 본 연구는 먼저 2022년에 변경되는 경찰채용시험, 특히 순경채용시험에 대한 전반적인 부분을 살펴보고 구체적으로는 과목별 출제범위, 특히 <형사소송법> 과목의 출제범위에 대해 언급하려고 한다. 최근 경찰채용시험에서 출제된 <형사소송법>과목의 출제경향을 분석하고 아울러 변경되는 경찰채용시험에 적합한 <형사소송법>과목의 출제범위를 제시하고자 한다. 새롭게 시행되는 과목개편인 만큼 여러 시행착오가 있겠지만 본 연구가 조그만한 도움이 되었으면 하는 바이다.