당사자주의 소송구조에 있어 범죄피해자의 권리

류병관(Ryu, Byung Kwan) 한국피해자학회 2011 被害者學硏究 Vol.19 No.1

Our country(South Korea)'s victimology has recently showed many outcomes, starting with the introduction of 2004 Crime Victims Act. It established the Criminal Victims-related Regulation in 2007, June, 01 through the revision of Criminal Procedure Law, introduced the Criminal Meditation in 2010, May, 14 through the revision of Criminal Victims Protection Law, and finally, from the late times of 2010, has considered the introduction of Victim Participation System under the leadership of the Ministry of Justice. However, the introduction of Criminal Victims' Participation in the procedure of a public trial can cause a conflict with the defendant's traditional rights protected by the Constitution or the Criminal Procedure Law, in the changing process of the Criminal Procedure Law that strengthens the Adversary System. Moreover, this conflict can be developed into the limiting factor of the extension of Victims' rights, concerning the question whether it can acknowledge victims as the procedure party and offer the proper rights to them. United States who has kept the adversary system throughly, has protected substantially the Victim's Right Regulations which have been suspected of their effectiveness, with the Federal Legislation, through the establishment of 2004 Crime Victims' Right act. This also has protected completely the victim's participation in the criminal procedure. At present, U. S, however, undergoes the confusion in the real enforcement of the law, in the interactions between the court, the prosecutor, and the defendant's rights, and the victim's rights after the enforcement of CVRA. This study investigates the debates aroused in the recent U. S after the 2004 enforcement of CVRA, surrounding the conflict of rights among the procedure subjects, which the criminal victim's participation in the Criminal Procedure in the Adversary System, can bring about.

형사사법절차에서 피해자재판절차진술권의 제 문제와 개선방안

신진희 한국피해자학회 2024 被害者學硏究 Vol.32 No.2

수사단계에서 통지문제로 피해자 진술권 행사가 어렵고, 경찰의 불송치결정에 대한 이의신청절차에서 고발인이 제외되어 아동 또는 장애인 대상 성폭력 사건이나 학대 사건에서 피해자의 권익침해 문제가 발생한다. 형사소송법에는 고소인 등 피해자의 증거보전청구권에 대한 일반 규정이 없다. 형사소송법에는 피해자에 대한 구속 전 피의자 심문기일 통지규정이 없다. 구속 전 피의자 심문절차에는 피해자변호사의 출석 및 의견진술권 규정만 있을 뿐이다. 보증금납입조건부 석방 시 피해자에 대한 위해 우려 등이 고려사항임에도 불구하고 구속적부심절차에서는 피해자 의사확인절차에 관한 규정이 없다. 구약식 절차가 정식재판으로 넘어가더라도 피해자가 아무런 통지를 받지 못한다. 기록열람등사권 관련하여 입법시도가 있으나 입법되지 못하였다. 피고인이 국민참여재판신청한 경우 피해자에게 통지되지 않고 의사확인절차규정이 없다. 공판절차에서 형사소송규칙상 피해자 의견진술권에는 피해자를 보호하는 비공개 및 피고인 퇴정에 관한 규정이 없다. 보석절차에 대한 통지 및 의견진술 기회를 보장하는 명문 규정이 없다. 기습공탁에 대한 피해자 의견확인절차에 대한 명문의 규정이 없다. 형사사법절차에서 피해자재판절차진술권 실질화를 위하여 형사소송법에 피해자의 개념에 대한 일반 규정을 두어 피해자의 법적 지위를 정립할 필요가 있고, 형사소송법에 피해자 국선변호사 선정대상, 선정요건 및 절차 등에 대한 일반 규정을 마련하고, 범죄피해자 참가제도를 입법화할 필요가 있다. Due to notification issues during the investigation stage, it is difficult for victims to exercise their right to testify, and in the procedure for filing an objection to the police’s decision not to forward the case, the complainant is excluded, leading to the infringement of victims' rights in cases of sexual violence or abuse involving children or people with disabilities. The Criminal Procedure Act does not contain general provisions regarding the right of victims, such as complainants, to request evidence preservation. There is also no provision in the Criminal Procedure Act for notifying victims of the date of the pre-detention suspect interrogation. The pre-detention suspect interrogation procedure only includes provisions for the attendance of the victim's lawyer and the right to express opinions. Despite the consideration of the risk of harm to the victim in cases of release on bail, the procedure for reviewing the validity of detention does not include a provision for confirming the victim's intention. Even if a summary trial proceeds to a formal trial, the victim is not notified. Legislative attempts have been made regarding the right to access and copy records, but these have not been successful. When a defendant requests a jury trial, there is no regulation for notifying the victim or confirming the victim's intention. In the trial process, the victim's right to express opinions according to the Criminal Procedure Rules does not include provisions for protecting the victim, such as non-disclosure or the exclusion of the defendant. There is no explicit regulation ensuring notification and the opportunity to express opinions in bail procedures. There is also no explicit regulation regarding the procedure for confirming the victim's opinion in the case of a surprise deposit. To substantiate the victim’s right to testify in the criminal justice process, it is necessary to establish general provisions in the Criminal Procedure Act defining the concept of the victim and establishing the victim's legal status. Furthermore, it is necessary to establish general provisions regarding the criteria, qualifications, and procedures for appointing court-appointed counsel for victims, and to legislate a system for victim participation in criminal proceedings.

미국의 범죄피해자의 법적 권리에 관한 고찰

이영돈(Young Don, Lee) 서강대학교 법학연구소 2015 서강법률논총 Vol.4 No.2

Victims’ rights are legal rights afforded to victims of crime. The Crime Victims’ Rights Movement in the United States is based on the idea that the American justice system strayed too far from its victim-centric origins. From the 1970s, the movement has worked to give victims a more role in criminal proceedings, aiming at the inclusion of "the individual victim as a legally recognized participant with rights and interests. Since 1982, thirty-three states have defined victim’s rights in their state constitutions. In 2004, the landmark Crime Victims’ Rights Act was enacted and permitting victims eight specific rights, and providing standing for individual victims to assert those rights in court. The Act grants victims the following rights: 1. The right to protection from the accused, 1. The right to notification, 1. The right not to be excluded from proceedings, 1. The right to speak at criminal justice proceedings, 1. The right to consult with the prosecuting attorney, 1. The right to restitution, 1. The right to a proceedings free from unreasonable delay, 1. The right to be treated with fairness, and respect for the victims’ dignity and privacy This study examined these victim’s rights and suggested recommendation to improve the victim’s rights in Korea.

성범죄재판에서 ‘피해자다움’이란 있는가?: 좁은 의미의 피해자다움의 논리에 대한 비판적 논의

김선희 이화여자대학교 한국여성연구원 2019 여성학논집 Vol.36 No.1

본 논문의 목표는 성범죄재판에서 피해자에게 피해자다울 것을 요구하는 <피해자다움>의 논리를 비판하고, 전형적인 의미의 ‘피해자다움’이란 없다는 것을 논의하는 것이다. 이 목적을 위해, 이 논문에서는 이상적인 피해자상을 전제하지 않는 ‘좁은 의미의 피해자다움’에 초점을 두어 논의하고자 한다. ‘좁은 의미의’ 피해자다움은 상대적으로 피해자다움의 범위를 좁게 설정함으로써 피해자다움을 요구하는 조건이나 범위를 최소화하는 것으로 보인다. 그럼에도 불구하고 좁은 의미의 피해자다움 개념도 심각한 문제가 있다는 것을 논의함으로써, 궁극적으로 성범죄 법정에서 <피해자다움>의 개념은 폐기되어야 한다는 것을 논의하고자 한다. 나아가 피해자의 전형적인 행위란 존재하지 않기에, 피해자의 행위를 이해하기 위한 적절한 모델은 인과적 모델이 아니라 피해자의 입장에서 피해자의 이유를 공유하는 시뮬레이션 모델이라는 것을 논의할 것이다. 또한 대법원판결에서 언급한 성인지 감수성을 해석할 수 있는 하나의 대안으로서 시뮬레이션 행위이해모델을 검토할 것이다. The purpose of this paper is to criticize the logic of "victim-likeness" in the sexual crime trial and to discuss that there is no typical type of victims. I will argue that the myth of victim-likeness weakens the credibility of the victim's statement and, as a result, promotes distorted judgment. For this purpose, this article focuses on 'the narrow sense of victim-likeness'. The narrow concept of victim-likeness seems to minimize the conditions or range of victim-likeness by setting a relatively narrow range of victim-like actions. Nevertheless, by discussing that there is a serious problem of the narrow concept of victim-likeness, I will argue that the narrow concept itself is also unreasonable. Thus, I will show that the concept of victim-likeness introduced in the sexual crime trial is not justified. I discuss that the concept of victim-likeness is unnecessary and even harmful in order to judge the credibility of a victim's statement, and ultimately the concept of victim-likeness should be discarded in a sexual crime tribunal. Furthermore, I will argue that the appropriate model for understanding the victim's behavior is not a causal model but a simulation model for the victim's position. I will also examine the model of simulation as an alternative to interpret gender sensitivity.

범죄피해평가의 형사사법절차상 효과 분석 - 판례분석을 중심으로 -

윤상연,김영수 한국피해자학회 2022 被害者學硏究 Vol.30 No.1

Since 2016, the police has been implementing the Victim Assessment System, which uses external experts to evaluate the victim’s damage in order to support victims suffering from crime. Several scholars have expressed concerns about the system as much as expected, but now it is positioned as a representative system of the police's victim support policy. The satisfaction of victims, the users, is high, and even some cases have been confirmed in determining the arrest or sentencing of suspects. However, only a few cases were insufficient to recognize the effect of the victim assessment system, especially the legal effect. In this study, in order to evaluate the effect of the victim assessment, the current status of the use of the victim assessment report in precedents was examined. It was expected that the stability of the effect could be confirmed by analyzing the frequency and method of using of the victim assessment report in the precedent. As a result of searching with the internet assess to judgment system, the victim assessment report was used as evidence in more precedents than expected. Among the 68 cases available for review, the victim assessment report was used as the basis for sentencing in most cases analyzed. In some precedents, it was also used as an evidence for judging facts, including judging elements such as mental injury or reinforcing the reliability of other evidences in cases where there was insufficient evidence. Various strategies were proposed to expand the target victims, strengthen the legal basis, and strengthen the effectiveness of the system for revitalizing the system that has been confirmed to be effective. 2016년부터 경찰에서는 범죄로 고통받는 피해자를 지원하기 위해 외부 전문가를 활용, 피해실태를 평가하는 범죄피해평가제도를 실시하고 있다. 학계에서는 이 제도에 대해 기대 못지않게 우려도 많이 표해 왔지만, 이제 범죄피해평가제도는 경찰의 피해자 지원정책을 대표하는 제도로 자리 잡는 분위기다. 이용자인 피해자의 만족도가 높고, 일부지만 피의자 구속 또는 양형 판단에 활용된 사례들이 확인되고 있어 기대감이 커지는 상황이다. 그러나 몇 가지 사례들만으로 범죄피해평가제도의 효과, 특히 법적인 효과를 인정하기에는 부족함이 있다. 본 연구에서는 범죄피해평가의 효과를 보다 확실하게 평가하기 위해 판례에서 범죄피해평가 보고서의 활용 현황을 살펴보았다. 판례에서 피해평가 보고서의 활용 빈도・방식 등을 분석하여 효과의 안정성을 확인할 수 있을 것으로 기대하였다. 판결서 인터넷열람 시스템을 활용하여 검색한 결과 범죄피해평가 보고서는 예상보다 많은 판례에서 증거로 활용되고 있었으며, 그중 열람 가능한 68건의 판례(검색 기간: 2016.4.~2022.3.) 내용을 분석한 결과 피해평가 보고서는 분석 대상 판례 대부분에서 양형의 근거로 활용되고 있었다. 일부 판례에서는 정신적 상해 등 구성요건을 판단하거나, 증거가 부족한 사건에서 다른 증거의 신빙성을 강화하는 등 사실판단의 근거로도 활용되고 있었다. 효과성이 확인된 범죄피해평가제도의 활성화를 위한 대상 피해자 확대 방안, 법적 근거 강화 방안, 그리고 제도의 실효성을 강화하기 위한 다양한 전략들을 제안하였다.

범죄피해자의 의견진술권에 관한 연구

박상식(Park, Sang-Sik) 한국피해자학회 2006 被害者學硏究 Vol.14 No.1

The position of crime victim is recently raised again through establishment by crime victim protect law but it is only form. In common, criminal course, protection of victim is divided into manhunt stage, public trial (judgment) stage, and the execution of a sentence stage. Especially, in these stages, public trial stage, first of all, victim’s victim impact statement is important. Therefore, in our nation’s constitution law, article 27th clause 5 and criminal procedure law, article 294 clause 2, victim’s right of opinion statement is prescribed but they don’t smoothly play a role for various problems. In the U.S.A. case, there are two statement, the one is VIS(Victim Impact Statement) which states victim results in formalities of assessment of a case and the other is VSO(Victim Statement Opinion) which states opinion of assessment of a case are prescribed, and they maximumly guarantee victim. These ayes or noes of prescriptions are argued away but, in the U.S.A., most of states are carrying out. England, Germany, France are existing action civil, especially Germany has the system of Nebenklage, she guarantees victim’s participation of public trial course. Yet, our nation don’t approve these systems and, in the only law, it is formally guaranteeing victim’s right of opinion statement in the public trial course. Accordingly, in the future these advanced nation’s systems introductions are urgent. This article criticizes for problems of victim’s opinion statement system in our nation, and considers a counterplan. And especially I forcus to look into the U.S.A.’s VIS and VSO, and view to how can we apply.

형사사법절차에 있어서 범죄피해자 참여제도의 확대 방안

정주섭 가천대학교 법학연구소 2017 가천법학 Vol.10 No.4

The recent international trend towards victims of crime focuses on 'strengthening basic rights for the protection of victims', which reflects the basic principles of the declaration of victims of the UN resolution. In Korea, as the crime measures are increasingly shifting from criminals to criminal victims, academic studies are accelerating the study of victims. A victim of a crime is subjected to tremendous psychological, physical, economic, and social harm in the unfortunate event caused by the cause of the victim, not by the victim himself. States that are empowered by the people as a sovereignty of national sovereignty shall thoroughly protect the lives, property and physical safety of each individual citizen. If victims of crime occur, they should do their best to recover the victims of crime without delay. It is necessary to retaliate on behalf of crime victims at the level of social sympathy, to prevent secondary damage that crime victims may have in the process, and to restore human life before crime victims, Is the first task to be carried out faithfully. The victims of crime want to be informed and reflected in their criminal justice process as well as in the trial process, and they want to have a lot of information about the process and outcome of the case, We want to be treated fairly and respected at all levels. The basic idea of ​​the Crime Victims Protection Act, revised on March 14, 2017, reflects these demands to ensure the dignity of victims of crime and to protect the reputation of honor and privacy, And the right to participate in the process. However, there is still a limit to the fact that crime victims are actively involved in the criminal justice process due to various restrictions and institutional reasons. In this regard, this study aims to enable victims of crime to participate more actively in criminal justice procedures and obtain victims' rights. In order to accomplish the purpose of this study, we first examine the current state of participation of crime victims in our country, and then analyze and examine overseas cases from a comparative legal point of view to find implications and expand participation of criminal victims in criminal justice procedures I would like to suggest a solution. 범죄피해자에 대한 최근의 국제적인 흐름은 UN이 결의한 피해자 선언의 기본원칙을 최대한 반영하는 ‘피해자보호를 위한 기본권의 강화’에 초점이 맞추어져 있다. 우리나라도 점차 범죄대책으로서 범죄자 중심에서 범죄피해자에 대한 영역을 확대시키는 방향으로 이동하고 있는 추세이며 학문적으로도 피해자학의 연구를 가속시키고 있는 실정이다. 범죄피해자는 본인 스스로 일으킨 것이 아닌 타인의 귀책사유로 말미암아 발생한 억울한 사건에서, 그 정도에 따라 막대한 심리적·신체적·경제적·사회적 타격을 받게 된다. 국민 주권 법치국가로서 국민으로부터 권한을 위임받은 국가는 국민 개개인의 생명과 재산 및 신체의 안전을 철저하게 보호 하여야하고, 만약 범죄로 인한 피해자가 발생하였을 경우에는 지체 없이 범죄피해자의 회복에 최선을 다하여야 한다. 사회적으로 공감하는 수준에서 범죄피해자를 대신하여 보복 한다는 것과, 그 과정에서 범죄피해자가 입을 수 있는 2차 피해를 방지하고, 범죄피해 전에 누렸던 인간다운 생활로의 회복을 해주어야 한다는 것은 권력을 위임받은 국가가 성실하게 이행해야 할 제1의 과제이다. 범죄의 피해자들은 형사사법절차에 있어서 수사의 단계 뿐 만 아니라 재판과정에 있어서도 자신들의 의견을 말하고 반영되기를 희망하고 있으며, 사건의 절차 진행과정이나 결과에 대하여 많은 정보를 가지기를 원하고 있고, 더 나아가 모든 단계에서 공정한 대우와 존중받게 되기를 원하고 있다. 2017년 3월 14일 일부 개정된 ‘범죄피해자 보호법’의 기본이념에서도 이러한 요구를 반영하여 범죄피해자의 존엄성을 보장하고, 명예와 사생활의 평온에 대한 보호 뿐 만 아니라, 해당사건과 관련하여 각종 법적 절차에 참여할 권리를 기본이념으로 하고 있다. 그럼에도 불구하고 아직 형사사법절차에 있어서 범죄피해자들이 여러 가지 제약과 제도적 미비 등의 사유로 적극적으로 참여하는 데에는 한계가 있는 실정이다. 이러한 점에 착안하여 이 연구는 범죄피해자가 형사사법절차에 보다 적극적으로 참여하여 피해자의 권리를 획득하도록 하는데 그 목적이 있다. 이 연구의 목적을 달성하기 위하여 먼저, 우리나라의 범죄피해자 참여 현황을 살펴보고, 다음으로 해외 사례들을 비교법적인 관점에서 분석·고찰하여 시사점을 모색하고 범죄피해자의 형사사법절차에 대한 참여가 확대될 수 있는 방안을 제시하고자 한다.

참여의 관점에서 바라본 피해자의 진술권

정도희(Do-Hee Jeong) 한국형사정책학회 2009 刑事政策 Vol.21 No.2

The Constitution enacted right so statement on trial of the victims and entrusted the concrete realization to Code of Crime Procedure Code of Crime Procedure revised in 2007 extended applicant of victim statement, allowed the victim to state in a course of trial, even the victim stated in a stage of investigation and edited out exceptive reason in application Even with this revision, it is quite irrational that right to statement of the victims is still based on the frame of examination of witness Once a victim states through examination of witness, the victim is no more the subject of statement, but the object of statement On top of that, even the denial of testimony regarding personal information is not admitted, so that the dignity of a victim can be violated It is not reasonable, in this case, that a victim states to bear of the danger to commit perjury The judicial system must escape from the current frame of examination of witness and edit out the exceptive reason in realizing victim statement It is time to introduce Victim Impact Statement as complementary measures about the current victim statement system. On this proposal, it is apprehended that the statement of a victim in a stage of sentencing can have an effect on the punishment of the defendant This concern can be cleared by giving opportunity to state about damage by a crime and its influence to only the victim after becoming final of defendant's conviction Right to victim statement is to be extended Since we acknowledge right of victim statement as a constitutional right, a powerful right of statement is granted to the victim. Introduction of Victim Impact Statement, as complementary measures, is likely to guarantee right to victim statement substantially

한국의 피해자참가제도

김재중(Kim, Jae-Jung) 충북대학교 법학연구소 2011 法學硏究 Vol.22 No.1

Recently, the Criminal Law Revision Committee in the Department of Justice offers the desirable introductions into our victim participation system by providing five provisions on criminal procedure act §§ 294-4~ 294-9. In order to adopt a direct participation system for crime victims, two possible ways are presently being considered. In the first proposal, crime victims become adverse parties in criminal trials (as in China or Germany). This proposal would require wide-ranging reforms of the current structure of the criminal litigation. Under the second way, crime victims are still participants in the criminal proceedings, but their right to and scope of participation is broadly expanded (as in Japan). This latter system allows the court to maintain - or only slightly modify - present criminal justice practices. I suggest the implementation of a victim participation system in Korea based primarily on the second model, but allowing crime victims abroad range of rights to participate in the criminal procedure, eventually admitting crime victims as quasi-adversarial parties at trial. After the initial implementation of the system, I believe that the second step is to move toward legislation following the first participation model. However, since the first model requires such tremendous changes in th present Korean criminal justice system, close monitoring of the victim participation model and further public discussions on this topic should be a prerequisite for adopting this model. The adoption of provisions to allow victims to participate in proceedings is an important change in the criminal procedure. Victims's right to participate in the proceedings is one of the main innovative features of the Court. Victim will have a right of Victim Impact Statement and Victim Statement Opinion in Korea. One of the court's main function is the establishment of truth and in this sense participation of victims may contribute to the accomplishment of this goal. A justice system cannot be complete without taking into account the existence of victims of crimes and what they have to say about the violence they have experienced during conflict situations.

초동수사와 피해자보호

김용세 ( Yong Se Kim ),김재민 ( Jae Min Kim ) 한국형사정책학회 2006 刑事政策 Vol.18 No.1

How the police investigators should respond properly to the criminal victim`s needs in the phase of preliminary investigation has an effect on victim`s rapid recovery from criminal impact. It is just because the Investigator`s behavioral patterns of being sensitive to the criminal victim`s needs make it possible for him to gain self-control and self-assurance. Such an investigator`s attitude could not only enhance the reliability of investigating authorities but also get the active cooperation from a victim easily. Finally, it inevitably contributes to catching the goal of investigation also. The importance of the criminal victim protection in the criminal investigation process, more than we have ever thought, has been widely known in these days. Recently, Korean police officer`s behavioral patterns for criminal victims have been remarkably improved than ever before, since the Office for Victims of Police Agency was established in 2004. This paper is mainly focused on the police investigator`s activity for criminal victim in preliminary investigation. A few following recommendations were proposed for improvement of behavioral patterns of victim protection in the course of investigation process. Firstly, several checkpoints which might be needed to assist victim in the phase of preliminary investigation were suggested. Secondly, the most essential and proper responses of investigators were introduced when they would receive the first call and arrive at the crime scene. Thirdly, to secure the victim`s personal safety, some of the guidelines regarding risk assessment were presented. Fourthly, the actual conditions of how victim would be offered information from investigators were analyzed. As a result, the several victim policies were recommended. Practice of these recommendations must empower the police investigators to get the credibility from all the people including the criminal victim.