비교법연구(比較法硏究) : 독일 증거금지론에 관한 소고 -사적 고찰 및 이론체계의 검토를 중심으로-

권영법 ( Young Bub Kwon ) 법조협회 2010 法曹 Vol.59 No.3

개정 형사소송법 제308조의 2가 시행된 후에도 독일의 증거금지론의 이익형량 입장에서 동조를 해석하는 견해가 다수 있고, 동조가 신설되기 직전의 대법원 전원합의체판결 역시 이익형량의 관점에서 위법배제여부를 판단하고 있어 독일의 증거금지론이 여전히 많은 영향력을 미치고 있다. 독일의 증거금지론을 사적으로 고찰하면 초창기, 과도기, 발전기, 후기로 나누어 볼 수가 있고, 증거금지론의 이론체계를 살펴보면, 증거금지는 증거조사금지와 증거사용금지로 나누어지며, 증거조사금지는 헌법상의 증거사용금지와 법률상의 증거사용금지로 나누어진다. 증거사용금지의 기준에는 다양한 견해가 제시되고 있고, 독일 연방대법원은 이익형량설에 입각하여 있다. 증거금지는 기본권보호에 크게 기여하였고 수사단계에 있어 증거수집방법을 제한하는 기능이 있다. 형사소송법 제308조의 2를 해석함에 있어서 독일 증거금지론의 이론적 틀을 그대로 도입하기 보다는 증거사용금지의 기준에 대한 학설을 면밀히 검토를 하여 우리의 현실에 맞는 새로운 해석을 할 필요가 있다고 하겠다.

디지털증거 압수수색에 관한 연구

박봉진 ( Bong Jin Park ),김상균 ( Sang Kyune Kim ) 제주대학교 법과정책연구원 2013 法과 政策 Vol.19 No.1

Cybercrime is one of the terms used to denote the use of computer technology to engage in unlawful activity. Computer crime, high-tech crime and information-age crime. Most of the cybercrime we have seen so far is nothing more than the migration of real-world crimes into cyberspace The other significant portion of cybercrime consists of specially defined cyber-offences-hacking, cracking and virus dissenmination-that are online version of real-world crimes. And Cybercrime are different to more conventinal crimes because of their mediation by computer technology. The mark of a true cybercrime is that it disappear once networked technology is removed characteristice of Informational. We are living in the digital age. Lots of people in the world are using the Internet and so we are spending our lifetime in the Cyberspace through the Internet. Digital evidence is difficult to treat, because digital information is easy to forge, alter, delete and modify. So several digital evidence collection tools and forensic tools are developed. However there are many problem of composition which is whole due process from evidence collection to submitting to the court because existing digital evidence collection process and tools have a vulnerability of guaranteeing integrity. Digital evidence of electronic evidence is probative information stored of transmitted in digital form. A party to a court case may use it at trial. Before accepting digital evidence, a court will determine if the evidence is relevant, whether it is authentic, if it is hearsay-evidence, and whether a copy is acceptable or the original is required. Digital evidence tends to be easily eliminated modified and duplicated. Digital evidence is often attacked for its authenticity due to the ease with which it can be eliminated of modified. Digital evidence is often ruled inadmissble by court because it was obtained without authorization. The intangible information cannot be viewed in the eyes nor defined in any forms. Evidence may not remain at place where a criminal activity has occurred. It is therefore necessary to have the special knowledge and skills for efficient investigation. In 2011, however, Korea Criminal Procedure was amended to include the duty to produce digital evidence. Nonetheless, the law enforcement demand to amend additionally the law to expand the scope of the duty to assist digital search warrant execution resulting in including duty to preserve digital evidence and duty to assist warrant execution. Some scholars and Judges have expressed different opinion over the additional revision.

대형 경제 형사사건의 효율적인 관리 및 증거조사 방법에 관한 연구 – 각국의 경제 형사사건 전담재판부 운영 실태 분석을 중심으로

홍진표 ( Hong Jin-pyo ),계인국,안문희 사법정책연구원 2016 연구보고서 Vol.2016 No.16

Given limited judicial resources, it is no easy task to allocate significant time and money to complex and complicated economic criminal cases that are characteristic of a large number of witnesses and copious documentary evidence. Even if one were to attempt this, it is unable to render substantive justice by finding truth and punishing law offenders through trial-based proceedings. Thus, it is necessary to manage large-scale economic criminal cases and employ methods of evidence examination in an efficient manner. Korea and numerous other countries have developed various management systems for large-scale economic criminal cases given each country’s respective political, economic, social, and historical background. This research aims to identify the current state and problems of the Korean management system, and conduct a comparative analysis among other countries, based on which long-term and short-to middle term improvement measures are examined. The present research begins by expounding the definition and categorization of economic criminal cases in Korea, and articulating the general characteristics of Korean economic criminal trials that require more time and money on witness examination and other evidence examination compared to other criminal cases because the defendant often denies charges despite relatively low acquittal rates. It then look into the establishment and status of chambers that specialize in and exclusively hear economic criminal cases, the modus operandi and problems of the management and methods of evidence examination of complex economic criminal cases. Second, this research conducts a comparative analysis among different countries including Germany, France, Japan, the United States, and the United Kingdom identifying similarities and differences in methods of management and evidence examination. While Germany, France and Japan have specialized courts and chambers for complex economic criminal cases, the United States and the United Kingdom do not. In the aforementioned countries, case assignment is not often modified over the short run so as to prevent instability in the handling of criminal cases. Although minor differences remain over details of their respective management systems, the all aforementioned countries differentiate between complex economic cases or cases where charges are denied by the defendant and simple minor economic cases including economic cases where the defendant does not deny charges due to plea bargaining. There is a fast track for the latter for which the procedure is simplified and expedited. In terms of complex and complicated economic cases, there are various systems that help the court find the substantive truth efficiently by means of sorting issues and evidence through trial preparations and intensively conducting evidence examination on trial. Based on such a comparative analysis, the present research purports to examine and prescribe specific long- and short-term improvement measures for addressing problems of the current system and judicial practices in Korea. Such long- and short-term improvement measures should be proposed based on a comprehensive understanding of criminal law and criminal procedure, and the public’s consent on the importance of striking a balance of interests between the defendant and the victim, as well as peace and stability of our society governed by law. Hopefully, this research will contribute to growing discussions among not only scholars, experts and practicians in the relevant field but also the general public in presenting alternative policy and legislative proposals that effectively manage complex economic criminal cases and methods of evidence examination in Korea.

민사소송에 있어서의 「조사의 촉탁」의 법적 성질

반흥식 한국민사소송법학회 2012 민사소송 Vol.16 No.1

Es wird die gerichtliche Aufforderung der erbetene Mitteilungen in unsererem ZPO von amtliche Auskunft in deutchem ZPO unterscheidet. Miteinander erwähnt hier aber auf gleiche Bedeutung. Was ist die Rechtsnatur der amtliche Auskunft? Es wird die deutschen dieselbe überprüfen um die Rechtsnatur der amtliche Auskunft in unserem ZPO zu analysieren. Amtliche Auskünfte sind erbetene Mitteilungen einer Behörde im futionalen Sinne über amtskundige, dh. in der Regel dort schriftlich niedergelegte oder überprüfbare Tatsachen. Nach wohl hA ist die Rechtsnatur der amtliche Auskunft ein einständiges Beweismittel, das aber nicht nur im Rahmen des Freibebeises anwendung findet, sondern auch als Mittel des Strengbeweises und dann den Bindungen der §§ 355ff. unterworfen ist. In der Abgrenzung zum Zeugenbeweis ist entscheidend, dass die Auskunftsperson innerhalb der Behörde austauschbar ist. Vom Urkundenbeweis unterscheidet sich die amtliche Auskunft dadurch,dass übersandten Schriftstücke erst auf Grund der gerichtlichen Aufforderung geschaffen wurden. S 1, 2 §273ⅠZPO ermöglicht dem Gericht, §273Ⅱ dem Vorsitzenden oder von ihm bestimmten Richter zur Vorbereitung jedes Termins solche Befugnisse,die eine Beweisaufnahme überflüssig machen oder im Termin erleichtern sollen. Demgegenüber ermöglicht §358a ZPO im Rahmen jener Vorschriften eine so rechtzeitige Anordnung und teilweise Durchführung einer für notwendig gehalten Beweisaufnahme, daß das Gericht deren Ergebnisse im Termin bereits nach §286 verwerten kann. Wird eine Auskunft gemäß §273 Abs.2 Nr.2 vorsorglich vor dem Termin eingeholt, dann ist das noch kein Beweisaufnahmeverfahren im Sinne der genannten Vorschrift. Eine Verletzung des Unmittelbarkeits–und Parteiöffen tlichkeitsgrundsatzes könnte insbesondere bei der amtlichen Auskunft darin liegen, daß im Wege der Verwertung dem Gericht Sachverhalte mitgeteilt werden, bei deren Zustandekommen die Parteien nicht persönlich zugegen qaren und auch ihr Fragerecht nach den §§397, 402 ZPO nicht ausüben konnten. Vor allem hat Peters aber darüber betont. Peters sagte, Die amtliche Auskunft ist streng zu unterscheiden von den manchmal ebenfalls Auskunft genannten Gutachten, die eine öffentliche Dienststelle in Frage der Angemessenheit und der Bewertung erteilt. Zum schluß Ich denke, Die amtliche Auskunft kann aber nicht in jedem Fall zulässig sein, weil sonst die Vorschriften der ZPO über die einzelnen Beweisarten und über die Durchführung des Beweises beiseite geschoben würden. Eine amtliche Auskunft ist deshalb nur in den Fällen zulässig, in denen eine Umgehung der beweisrechtlichen Vorschriften der unseres ZPO nicht zu besorgen ist.

전자정보 관련 법령 재정비에 대한 제언

윤세교 전북대학교 부설법학연구소 2023 法學硏究 Vol.73 No.-

본 논문은 CBDC 도입 시, 한국 사회에 CBDC를 신속하고 안정적으로 연착륙시켜 적시적인 효과 및 통화정책의 운용을 도모할 수 있는 방안을 모색하는 것을 목표로 한다. CBDC의 개념 요소와 기존 화폐 개념을 비교하여 그 속성 및 법적 성격을 분석한 결과 CBDC를 법화로 규정함으로써 각 경제주체 간 공통된 이해의 틀을 마련하고, 예측 가능성 및 법적안정성을 확보해야 한다는 점을 도출하였다. CBDC의 여러 유형 중에서도 계좌형 및 혼합형 방식은 사법상 거래관계에 관한 법적안정성과 집행법상의 실효성 및 한국은행 제도의 운용 취지를 준수하면서 기존의 민간금융기관의 인프라 등을 활용하여 효율적으로 신속하고 안정적인 제도 도입을 가능하게 한다는 점에서 적합한 도입방식이라고 본다. 구체적으로는 한국은행법 제·개정 예시 조문을 제시하여 계좌형, 혼합형 CBDC 발행을 위한 법적 근거를 제안한다. According to a recent decision on an appeal against a document submission order (Seoul High Court decision 2023D20237 dated August 10, 2023), in the process of determining whether electronic information is subject to a document submission order, the court It is rather rare to hold a large amount of information such as original data in paper form, and it is unreasonable that whether or not the information is subject to a document submission order varies depending on the form in which the information is held, and submission through a document submission order. Even if the information subject to this is in electronic form, it is reasonable to view it as a document subject to a document submission order under Article 344 of the Civil Procedure Act.' Supreme Court, 2018S34 en banc decision dated July 17, 2023, Supreme Court On August 28, 2023, a ruling was made to the same effect as Decision 2019Ma6212. It was ruled that This can be seen as a ruling that reflects the social change that in modern society, the form of ‘electronic information’ has as important a value as a method of evidence as the form of ‘paper’. Considering that such electronic information not only has high value as a method of evidence in litigation proceedings and is likely to be submitted in greater quantities in the future, it will be inevitable to establish the concept of electronic information and prepare procedures to collect and investigate it as evidence. The establishment of evidence investigation procedures for electronic information in the United States, many continental law countries, and recently in Japan shows the urgency of reorganizing our laws regarding electronic information. In particular, I think what should be noted in Japan's recent revisions to electronic information is the revision of the Civil Procedure Act, the basic law. The suggestions for reorganization of electronic information presented in this paper are minimal, and not only is it necessary to establish new procedures to reflect the characteristics of electronic information, but also because electronic information itself is subject to evidence investigation, it is necessary to unify the rules and procedures for it. Keeping in mind that there is a need to do so, it is time to seriously and thoroughly review the implications for us by referring to overseas legislative examples and to reorganize the civil procedure laws so that electronic information itself can be submitted and investigated as a method of evidence.