진술거부권의 고지 대상으로서의 "피의자"의 의미 = Study on the Meaning of "Suspect" as an Object of Miranda Notice under Korean Criminal Procedure Act

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Article 244-3 of Korean Criminal Procedure Act should be understood as the only and the most important device to guarantee the right of silence which is recognized under the Korean Constitution. Korean Supreme Court dealt with the issue of permissibility of evidence obtained without prior notice on the right of silence as well as the issue of what is a "Suspect" having the right of such prior notification in its recent decision(2011. 11. 10. decided, decision number 2011DO8125; hereinafter "The Decision"). In this article, for the purpose of reviewing the acceptability of The Decision`s rationale, we will first introduce substantial meaning of the Right of Silence and then review the component of Miranda Notice, especially "Custodial Interrogation". We also relate the definition of a "Suspect" under Korean Criminal Procedural Act and the meaning of "Custodial Interrogation" believing that both concepts are appeared to solve the problem of "Compulsion Inherent". Considering the above elements, The Decision seems to suggest the right answer in that it defines a suspect in substantial way rather than formalistic one. However, the concrete rationale it suggests in construing a "Suspect" does not seem to grasp Constitutional idea of right of silence. For instance, it suggests that a Suspect`s status starts only after a prosecutor find a suspicion of crime and enters into an investigation. It left too much discretion to the investigating authority to misuse its power for the purpose of obtaining illegal evidence. In conclusion, the Court should review every possible circumstances a person who is the object of interrogation could face and even he or she is not a Suspect officially, if he of she is in a situation of compulsion inherent and believed in the same situation as "Custodial Interrogation", it should be defined as a "Suspect" under Article 244-3 of Korean Criminal Procedure Act.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 임동규, "형사소송법(제7판)" 법문사 2011

2 차용석, "형사소송법(제2판)" 세영사 2004

3 신양균, "형사소송법" 법문사 2004

4 김일수, "형법각론(제7판)" 박영사 2009

5 조국, "헌법적 형사소송의 관점에서 본 형사절차상의 권리 및 제도 보장" 2000

6 김기범, "헌법상의 묵비권" 1968

7 백형구, "진술거부권의 보장" 1993

8 이재홍, "진술거부권의 고지가 결여된 피의자신문조서 등의 증거능력" 1993

9 권광중, "진술거부권의 고지 없이 얻은 피의자진술의 증거능력, In 법과정의-경사 이회창선생 화갑기념" 1995

10 박지현, "진술거부권에 관한 연구" 서울대학교 대학원 2007

11 안성수, "진술거부권 고지않은 조서의 증거능력"

12 김희옥, "진술거부권" 1988

13 조국, "위법수집증거배제법칙" 박영사 2005

14 류전철, "약속에 의한 자백과 유죄협상(PleaBargaining)" 한국비교형사법학회 7 (7): 203-226, 2005

15 이재상, "신형사소송법(제2판)" 박영사 2011

16 배종대, "신형사소송법 제3판" 홍문사 2011

17 신동운, "신형사소송법 제3판" 법문사 2011

18 심희기, "신이십세기파 사건판결의 재검토-진술거부권의 경고를 받을 권리" 1998

19 김성룡, "신분위장수사경찰？비밀정보원활용과 그 형사법적문제점에 관한 독일의 논의 현황" 한국비교형사법학회 7 (7): 247-270, 2005

20 권오걸, "스마트 형사소송법" 형설출판사 2012

21 문홍주, "불이익증언거부권에 관한 미국대법원 판례연구" 1999

22 이완규, "범죄인지서 작성 전에 행한 피의자신문조서의 증거능력-인지의 개념과 시기" 11 : 2003

23 Ronald V. Del. Carmen, "미국형사소송법" 길안사 1999

24 김기두, "묵비권" 1977

25 安 晟 秀, "각국의 위법수집증거 배제법칙과 우리법상 수용방안" 한국법학원 (96) : 187-236, 2007

26 Paul Cassell, "Will Miranda Survive?: Dickerson v. United States; The Right to Remain Silent, The Supreme Court, and Congress" (Summer) : 2000

27 Greenawalt, "Silence as a Moral and Constitutional Right" 23 : 1981

28 David Viens, "Say No More: Police Coercion of Self-Incriminating Statement Alone Not Violative of Self-Incrimination Clause" 38 : 2004

29 Yale Kamisar, "Modern Criminal Procedure, cases- comments-questions(12ed)" Thomson West

30 Steven B.Duke, "Does Miranda Protect the Innocent or the Guilty?" (Spring) : 2007

31 Watbe R, LaFave, "Criminal Procedure (3ed)" West group

32 Steven. L. Emanuel, "Criminal Procedure" Aspen Publishers 2005