보호처분의 결정 등에 대한 항고권자에 검사 또는 피해자 등을 포함시키지 않는 것의 타당성 여부 - 헌법재판소 2012. 7. 26. 선고 2011헌마232 결정을 중심으로 - = The validity not including the prosecutor or the victim, etc. in the appellant or not in connection with the decision on the protective disposition, etc.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The appeal in the juvenile law is corresponding to one kind of procedure to get relief by an appeal of dissatisfaction with the not yet decided decision to the higher court as meaning the dissatisfaction with the trial and the disposition of the juvenile protection case conducted by the juvenile department of the family court or the single judge of the juvenile department belonged to the district juvenile court under the jurisdiction of the place of an act, the dwelling place or the present address of a juvenile delinquent. There is a difference between the decision specified in the article 43 which has the character of final judgment in fact in this regard while the general appeal namely is intended for before end of trial in connection with the procedural matters in the course getting to the judgment; it may be judged that as a result the character of dissatisfaction with the final trial in the appeal of the juvenile law is relatively strong compared to the general appeal. If it is appraised like this, the necessity to allow the appeal in principle arises, it would not place a limit upon the person who can file of an appeal like the criminal procedure.
However, the Constitutional Court is presenting the legal opinion (4 persons) to the effect that the prosecutor or the victim, etc. is not included in the appellant in juvenile law is not in contrast to the principle of Constitution through the object decision. The concurring opinion (1 person) and the incompatible opinion with the constitution (3 persons) on this express the opinion that the current law reducing the range of appellant is necessary to be improved legislatively. It is judged the situation is that the question if it is valid for the prosecutor or the victim, etc. to be included in the appellant in the juvenile law indeed is not wiped out still, in the midst of confrontation with opinions tensely for whether or not of unconstitutionality for the corresponding regulations among total 8 judges involved in the constitutional appeal for the article 43 like the object decision. This study, based on the point at issue, is intended to draw the conclusion to the effect that the prosecutor or the victim, etc. shall be included in the appellant is valid for the purpose of presenting the additional reason for an argument with the parts not appeared in the concurring opinion and the incompatible opinion with the constitution as the center out of decision of the Constitutional Court.