RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      절차적 정의에 관한 국민의 인식이 경찰 수사권 지지에 미치는 영향 = A Study on the Impact of Public Perception of Procedural Justice on Support for Police Investigative Authority

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A109541843

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      Following the 2020 amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act, the investigative authority, which was previously concentrated with prosecutors, has been adjusted. This adjustment has significantly expanded the primary investigative authority and autonomy of the police, and granted them the authority to not forward cases, thereby allowing the police to secure part of the investigative conclusion authority. The exercise of investigative authority, particularly within the criminal justice system, is a process of imposing the state's punitive power, which strongly restricts freedom and rights. It also has a strong procedural nature in terms of realizing criminal procedure in practice. Therefore, it is crucial to ensure procedural legitimacy along with substantive justice and to comply with the rule of law as stipulated in the Constitution. This legitimacy can be evaluated through the trust and support of citizens. This study aims to empirically verify the extent to which the public expects and demands procedural justice in the exercise of police investigative authority, and how this perception affects support for police investigative authority and conclusion authority. Based on theoretical and criminal justice law grounds for procedural justice, the study collected and restructured public perception survey data on investigative structure reform for analysis and discussion.
      The study results indicate that both public expectations and demands for procedural justice significantly influence support for police investigative autonomy. In the case of support for investigative conclusion authority, procedural expectations were found to have a significant impact. Based on these results, the study suggests that, in addition to adhering to procedural limits according to legal principles, it is necessary to improve procedural attitudes towards counterparts, enhance police investigative expertise through the expansion and strengthening of professional personnel and education, and maintain and strengthen the fairness and neutrality of police investigative authority through legal and institutional improvements.
      번역하기

      Following the 2020 amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act, the investigative authority, which was previously concentrated with prosecutors, has been adjusted. This adjustment has significantly expanded the primary investigative authority and autonomy...

      Following the 2020 amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act, the investigative authority, which was previously concentrated with prosecutors, has been adjusted. This adjustment has significantly expanded the primary investigative authority and autonomy of the police, and granted them the authority to not forward cases, thereby allowing the police to secure part of the investigative conclusion authority. The exercise of investigative authority, particularly within the criminal justice system, is a process of imposing the state's punitive power, which strongly restricts freedom and rights. It also has a strong procedural nature in terms of realizing criminal procedure in practice. Therefore, it is crucial to ensure procedural legitimacy along with substantive justice and to comply with the rule of law as stipulated in the Constitution. This legitimacy can be evaluated through the trust and support of citizens. This study aims to empirically verify the extent to which the public expects and demands procedural justice in the exercise of police investigative authority, and how this perception affects support for police investigative authority and conclusion authority. Based on theoretical and criminal justice law grounds for procedural justice, the study collected and restructured public perception survey data on investigative structure reform for analysis and discussion.
      The study results indicate that both public expectations and demands for procedural justice significantly influence support for police investigative autonomy. In the case of support for investigative conclusion authority, procedural expectations were found to have a significant impact. Based on these results, the study suggests that, in addition to adhering to procedural limits according to legal principles, it is necessary to improve procedural attitudes towards counterparts, enhance police investigative expertise through the expansion and strengthening of professional personnel and education, and maintain and strengthen the fairness and neutrality of police investigative authority through legal and institutional improvements.

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼