http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 탁상진 ( Tak Sangjin ) (검색결과 2 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
탁상진 ( Tak Sangjin ),서용성,김성화,이단비 사법정책연구원 2023 연구보고서 Vol.2023 No.11
A criminal trial is a series of procedures to discover the substantive truth, identify the perpetrator who committed the crime, and impose criminal sanctions on him or her. Due to the irreversible nature of the punishment, which typically entails physical restraint of the offender, it is unavoidable to elect the appropriate punishment prudently. Additionally, the criminal trial itself has a significant impact on society, which has a great impact on how people develop confidence in the judiciary. Despite the function and significance of criminal trials, judges’ reluctance to conduct criminal trials has escalated in recent years, which has caused a decline in case processing rates and delays in trials. The first and most commonly mentioned reason for judges’ reluctance to conduct criminal trials is excessive workload. According to the strengthening of court-oriented trials, the practice of holding all of the arguments in court may guarantee the defendant's right to a defense and a full hearing, but it inevitably lengthens the time and effort invested in a case, which will lead to an increase in workload. Judges also brought up the external pressures placed on criminal cases, the disclosure of their private lives, and the inconvenience of paper records that have not been converted to electronic format. This study first identifies the current situation and factors contributing to judges’ avoidance of criminal trials in Korea through literature analysis and in-depth interviews with legal professionals. It then looks at the division of criminal responsibilities and criminal trial systems in the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, France, and Japan. After obtaining inferences from a comparative legal analysis of criminal justice systems in other countries, this study suggests improvement measures for the operation of judges in criminal cases in Korea. First, keeping a reasonable workload and enhancing the work environment are two essential elements in the effective operation of judges in criminal cases. Especially in light of the overburdened workload, which is the main contributing factor, it is necessary to increase the number of judges and law clerks who support them in order to decrease the number of cases per judge in quantitative respect. Despite the fact that the number of cases per judge in Korea is incomparably higher than in Europe or Japan, recent changes to the environment of criminal trials have accelerated the increase in workload. The most fundamental resolve is, without a doubt, to increase the range of judicial resources. Following that, extending the subject- matter jurisdiction of single-judge criminal cases can be considered as a means of actually reducing the number of cases per judge through the system. This is consistent with the recent expansion of civil single-judge jurisdiction and family single-judge jurisdiction. In terms of case quality with regard to workload, i.e., the difficulty of cases, it is necessary to select and focus on the dualization of criminal cases so that cases where the defendant confesses or minor cases with clear evidence are handled quickly, while cases, where the offense is serious, are handled deliberately. Furthermore, the specialized criminal courts that deal exclusively with complex, specialized, and difficult cases are required to respond proactively and efficiently to intelligent crimes that are becoming more sophisticated as society changes. In addition to the aforementioned discussion of judicial workload, it is important to examine the work environment. The committees on the division of responsibilities that are currently in place at all levels of courts ought to consider the effectiveness and appropriateness of criminal trials, the preferences and expertise of judges, previous workloads, and equity when deciding how to divide responsibilities. This report specifically suggests looking at judges’ overall workload, not just within each court, and establishing a minimum number of years of service in criminal trials as well as giving more weight to years of service, particularly as an associate judge in criminal trials. Additionally, as incentives for judges in charge of criminal trials, which are typically avoided by most judges, it is recommended to implement measures such as ensuring long-term service in the desired area, providing training opportunities to strengthen professionalism, exempting on-call for warrants, establishing actual expenses and allowances related to criminal trials, as well as providing preferential measures including dedicated parking spaces and exemption of weekly car-free days. Finally, it is proposed to create a single channel of communication through the court press office to address unfair pressures and reports from the outside media, supplement and improve current personal protection provisions to effectively protect judges and their families from harm such as assault and intimidation, and enact legislation for the aggravated punishment of the crimes committed in retaliation against judges. In order to settle and develop into a successful system, the previously stated road map for the proper operation of judges in criminal cases must be implemented organically and in harmony with various systems. It is difficult to anticipate significant changes promptly because this involves budgetary and legislative issues. The public's confidence in the judiciary, however, is directly related to the proper operation of criminal courts, and if that confidence diminishes, the existence of the judiciary will be jeopardized. It is not a matter of personal preference for most judges to prefer not to participate in criminal trials; rather, there is a structural issue with the operation of criminal courts. In light of this understanding of reality, this report identifies the issues and suggests an array of possible solutions. It is important to keep in mind in this discussion that the protection of the public’s right to a fair trial is at the core of what we are trying to accomplish through the efficient operation of judges in criminal cases. Hopefully, the suggestions in this report are expected to be helpful in the future when developing and improving the criminal justice system.
-
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
