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
    KCI우수등재

    민사소송에서 공동소송인의 증인적격 = Can a co-plaintiff or co-defendent be a witness?

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A109140608

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    It is not uncommon in practice for a co-plaintiff or co-defendent to be examined as a witness regarding the content related to their own claim. So far, issues concerning witness examination of a party have mainly been discussed in criminal proceedings, particularly regarding the admissibility of a co-defendant as a witness. Consequently, in civil trials, without special consideration, the arguments of co-plaintiffs or co-defendents may be separated, and witness examinations may be conducted separately. However, it cannot be readily acknowledged that separating arguments to examine related co-plaintiffs or co-defendents as witnesses falls within the discretion of the court's argument separation.
    Of course, if a co-plaintiff or co-defendent attends the witness examination voluntarily and testifies, and if the opposing party does not object to it, according to Article 151 of the Civil Procedure Act, the right to object is forfeited, and the evidentiary value of the witness examination results may be recognized. However, the issue of sanctioning for perjury or fines due to the violation of the obligation as a witness by a co-plaintiff or co-defendent is a separate matter. Even if argument separation is within the court's discretion, it is difficult to justify sanctions solely on the grounds that the co-plaintiff or co-defendent violated the duty as a witness after separating arguments solely for witness examination and adopting the co-plaintiff or co-defendent as a witness, as there is no necessity for argument separation or evidence gathering. Instead of examining a co-plaintiff or co-defendant as a witness, there is another type of evidence to consider in examining a co-party, which may offer even greater advantages to the party seeking evidence under Article 369 of the Civil Procedure Act.
    Practical improvements in the court's proceedings are expected through the comparison and analysis of the differences between the duties of a witness and those of a party as outlined in this text, along with the introduction of foreign discussions on the limits of argument separation.
    번역하기

    It is not uncommon in practice for a co-plaintiff or co-defendent to be examined as a witness regarding the content related to their own claim. So far, issues concerning witness examination of a party have mainly been discussed in criminal proceedings...

    It is not uncommon in practice for a co-plaintiff or co-defendent to be examined as a witness regarding the content related to their own claim. So far, issues concerning witness examination of a party have mainly been discussed in criminal proceedings, particularly regarding the admissibility of a co-defendant as a witness. Consequently, in civil trials, without special consideration, the arguments of co-plaintiffs or co-defendents may be separated, and witness examinations may be conducted separately. However, it cannot be readily acknowledged that separating arguments to examine related co-plaintiffs or co-defendents as witnesses falls within the discretion of the court's argument separation.
    Of course, if a co-plaintiff or co-defendent attends the witness examination voluntarily and testifies, and if the opposing party does not object to it, according to Article 151 of the Civil Procedure Act, the right to object is forfeited, and the evidentiary value of the witness examination results may be recognized. However, the issue of sanctioning for perjury or fines due to the violation of the obligation as a witness by a co-plaintiff or co-defendent is a separate matter. Even if argument separation is within the court's discretion, it is difficult to justify sanctions solely on the grounds that the co-plaintiff or co-defendent violated the duty as a witness after separating arguments solely for witness examination and adopting the co-plaintiff or co-defendent as a witness, as there is no necessity for argument separation or evidence gathering. Instead of examining a co-plaintiff or co-defendant as a witness, there is another type of evidence to consider in examining a co-party, which may offer even greater advantages to the party seeking evidence under Article 369 of the Civil Procedure Act.
    Practical improvements in the court's proceedings are expected through the comparison and analysis of the differences between the duties of a witness and those of a party as outlined in this text, along with the introduction of foreign discussions on the limits of argument separation.

    더보기

    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