RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    수사구조 개혁의 방향 - 독점에서 분점으로, 통제에서 견제로 - = he directionality of investigative structure reform – from monopoly to division, from control to checks and balances -

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A110005501

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    The government’s recent prosecution reform legislation focuses on abolishing the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office(SPO) and establishing the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency and the Prosecution Office, transferring SPO’s investigative and prosecution functions to them. This paper, addressing the debate over the adjustment of investigative powers in the prosecution reform legislation, analyzes the trends in investigative reform over the past 30 years, evaluates the National Assembly’s legislative proposals, and proposes a desirable direction for investigative reform that is unshakable in the face of political power shifts.
    This article analyzes the process of adjusting investigative powers over the past 30 years, including the conflicts represented by the adjustment of investigative powers, by era. As a result, it was confirmed that the process of adjusting investigative authority is currently shifting from an era of monopoly and control by the prosecution to one of division and mutual checks and balances. Furthermore, it confirms through Constitutional Court precedents that investigative and indictment powers are not the exclusive authority of prosecutors in SPO, and examines the pros and cons of the prosecution reform legislation based on its constitutional legitimacy. The four bills for prosecutorial reform, focusing on the abolition of SPO and the separation of prosecutors' investigative and prosecutorial powers, are evaluated as failing to properly implement the principles of democratic control over investigative powers. Accordingly, this article proposes a direction for investigative reform that is unaffected by changes in the political landscape. Furthermore, it proposes alternatives, such as overcoming the dual investigative structure to unify it and establishing checks and balances between investigative agencies and between the Prosecution Office and investigative agencies to ensure sound checks and balances on investigative power.
    With the abolition of SPO becoming a reality, establishing a control model that ensures the independence and fairness of authority between each agency, and restoring cooperative relationships between the Prosecution Office and investigative agencies, as well as between each investigative agency, will be crucial for future reform efforts. This will protect the public’s human rights, addressing the risks of dual investigations and delays in case processing, while also enabling a focus on uncovering the truth.
    번역하기

    The government’s recent prosecution reform legislation focuses on abolishing the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office(SPO) and establishing the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency and the Prosecution Office, transferring SPO’s investigative and prosecuti...

    The government’s recent prosecution reform legislation focuses on abolishing the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office(SPO) and establishing the Serious Crimes Investigation Agency and the Prosecution Office, transferring SPO’s investigative and prosecution functions to them. This paper, addressing the debate over the adjustment of investigative powers in the prosecution reform legislation, analyzes the trends in investigative reform over the past 30 years, evaluates the National Assembly’s legislative proposals, and proposes a desirable direction for investigative reform that is unshakable in the face of political power shifts.
    This article analyzes the process of adjusting investigative powers over the past 30 years, including the conflicts represented by the adjustment of investigative powers, by era. As a result, it was confirmed that the process of adjusting investigative authority is currently shifting from an era of monopoly and control by the prosecution to one of division and mutual checks and balances. Furthermore, it confirms through Constitutional Court precedents that investigative and indictment powers are not the exclusive authority of prosecutors in SPO, and examines the pros and cons of the prosecution reform legislation based on its constitutional legitimacy. The four bills for prosecutorial reform, focusing on the abolition of SPO and the separation of prosecutors' investigative and prosecutorial powers, are evaluated as failing to properly implement the principles of democratic control over investigative powers. Accordingly, this article proposes a direction for investigative reform that is unaffected by changes in the political landscape. Furthermore, it proposes alternatives, such as overcoming the dual investigative structure to unify it and establishing checks and balances between investigative agencies and between the Prosecution Office and investigative agencies to ensure sound checks and balances on investigative power.
    With the abolition of SPO becoming a reality, establishing a control model that ensures the independence and fairness of authority between each agency, and restoring cooperative relationships between the Prosecution Office and investigative agencies, as well as between each investigative agency, will be crucial for future reform efforts. This will protect the public’s human rights, addressing the risks of dual investigations and delays in case processing, while also enabling a focus on uncovering the truth.

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼