조사자증언제도에 대한 비판적 소고(小考) = Critical Analysis on Investigator`s Testimony in Court

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

It has been 5 years since Korean Criminal Procedure Code amended extensively. Through this 2007 amendment, the investigator`s testimony in court could admissible as an evidence by Art. 316, which is related to the hearsay statements. The trial-oriented court proceeding was emphasized in the 2007 amendment and this investigator`s testimony code was also the part of it. If the scholars want to treat investigator`s testimony in court as a part of the trial-oriented court proceeding, however, it should be on the premise that the code about the protocol of suspect examination written by police officer or prosecutor(Art. 312) has to be revised. Korean criminal procedure code still grants the document form of police officer or prosecutor as an evidence, and accepts the statement form of them as an evidence at the same time. This brings the crucial structural contradiction to the law construction and even to the law enforcement. As long as this situation maintains, it can be possibile that illegal investigation would be brought into being and the defendant`s right to defend himself would be infringed. Now, it is the right time to solve this ironical issue with the fundamental decision. If the report of suspect examination written by prosecutor could be inadmissible, the investigator`s testimony in court would be able to carry out its original purpose.