미국·영국·프랑스에서의 디엔에이(DNA) 채취법에 대한 위헌논의와 한국에의 시사점

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The DNA law of Korea was enacted in 2010, long after a debate among interest groups, due to its possibility of violating human dignity and individual privacy. At the time of its enactment, the law was expected to enhance effectiveness in crime investigation, by allowing investigatory authorities to obtain biological samples from detained suspects and convicted persons. Counter to the original expectation, however, the DNA law is currently highly controversial among scholars and human-rights groups about its constitutionality. In addition to that, five persons respectively appealed to the Korean Constitutional Court (the KCC) and those cases are currently pending and will be reviewed by the judges of the KCC.
The main issue of these cases is the constitutionality of Article 6 of the DNA law, that allows investigatory police officers to seek a warrant from a judge to obtain biological samples from a suspect who is not convicted but in detention. This paper studies and compares with the arrestee statutes of the United States, the United Kingdom, and France, which allow investigatory authorities to gather biological samples form arrestees who are not convicted of some specific offences. Part II, III, and IV of this article focus on explaining and comparing current cases that deal with the constitutionality of the arrestee statutes of the three countries. And Part V suggests a few issues that must be considered in the discussion of constitutionality of the DNA law in Korea.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• I. 들어가며
• II. 미국의 DNA 채취법과 관련판례
• III. 영국의 DNA 채취법과 유럽인권법원 판례
• IV. 프랑스의 DNA 채취법과 합헌판례
• V. 우리나라에서의 위헌논의에 주는 시사점
• VI. 맺으며
• 참고문헌
• Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 박용철, "피의자의 유전자정보 채취의 제문제" 한국형사정책학회 18 (18): 9-32, 2006

2 이성기, "미국의 체포․수색․압수제도의 이해 - 위법수집증거배제법칙과 명확성 원칙의 관점에서" 경찰대학 11 (11): 31-59, 2011

3 국가인권위원회, "디엔에이신원확인정보의 이용 및 보호에 관한 법률｣관련 헌법소원사건(2011헌마28등)에 대한 의견제출"

4 Peterson, Anna, S, "United Kingdom: The European Court of Human Rights Overturns the United Kingdom’s Procedure for the Indefinite Retention of Unconvicted Person’s Personal Data" 18 : 557-571, 2010

5 Deray, Erica Solange, "The Double-Helix Double Edged Sword: Comparing DNA Retention Policies of the United States and the United Kingdom" 44 : 745-755, 2011

6 Ghanaat, Bina, "Technology and Privacy: the Need for an Appropriate Mode of Anal ysis in the Debate over the Federal Dna Act" 42 : 1315-1323, 2009

7 "R v. the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis"

8 Bowers, Josh, "Punishing The Innocent" (156) : 1117-1145, 2008

9 "Public Safety Canada 홈페이지"

10 "Protection of Freedoms Bill of 2011, Chapter 1, 1"

11 Krimsky, Sheldon, "Genetic Justice" 35 : 2010

12 "GeneWatch 홈페이지"

13 Hutchison, Thomas W, "Federal Sentencing Law and Practice Current Through the 2011 Update, FSLP §5B1.3"

14 Department of Justice, "DNA-Sample Collection and Biological Evidence Preservation in the Federal Jurisdiction" 73 (73):

15 하태영, "DNA 관리법과 DNA 감정 - 디엔에이신원확인정보의 이용 및 보호에 관한 법률" 법학연구소 (48) : 287-323, 2010

16 Ferdico, John N, "Criminal Procedure for the Criminal Justice Professional" 48 (48): 2004

17 "Consultation on the Acquisition and Retention of DNA and Fingerprint Data in Scotland"

18 "CODIS Combined DNA INDEX System"

19 Rules and Regulations, Department of Justice, "28 CFR Part 28, 73 FR 74932, 2008 WL5155929"

20 임지봉, "'디엔에이신원확인 정보의 이용 및 보호에 관한 법률안'의 위헌성과 기타의 문제점 및 그 대안" 법학연구소 11 (11): 107-128, 2009

21 조성용, "'DNA신원확인정보의 이용 및 보호에 관한 법률'에 대한 비판적 검토" 한국형사정책연구원 21 (21): 223-258, 2010