미국 대배심 제도의 현황 및 개선 논의 = The Current Picture of the American Grand Jury System and Proposals for Its Reform

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Rendering the right decision in the investigation and indictment procedure is pivotal in achieving criminal justice. To that end, all nations by various means seek to accomplish this goal. Examples of this would include nations endowing exclusive charging authorities to the prosecutor while others allow lay citizens to participate in the actual procedure. Citizen participation always carries the risk of undermining the efficacy of the criminal justice system but it can also facilitate the average citizen's understanding of and increase trust in the system.
Historically, the grand jury has been the institution by which citizens can play an active role in the investigation and charging process. Beginning in the colonial period, the American grand jury protected the citizen's right in investigation and charging procedure and served as a check on the validity and efficacy of public functions. Despite much doubt regarding the objectivity of the grand jury as a mere organ of the prosecution as well as concern about its efficiency, its role has for the most part proved to be positive. The grand jury by taking part in the actual investigation and then deciding whether or not to indict has been a check on the power of the police and prosecution in major cases.
In the United States the grand jury operates in different forms. Some jurisdictions require grand jury indictments for felonies while others make them optional. In addition, there are many variations among jurisdictions in ensuring procedural rights in grand jury procedures. However, basic procedures such as beginning an investigation by way of subpoena and reaching indictment decisions through jury deliberations remain common.
In the United States, the necessity for grand jury reform such as enhancing jury independence and ensuring procedural rights of the witness and defendant have long been and continues to be proposed.
The mere separation of investigative power from charging power can hinder efforts in achieving criminal justice goals. Using the American model as a base for our nation, it would be expedient to allow for different organizations to exercise these powers independently. Furthermore, policies in which citizens can take on decisive roles in the investigation and charging process must be established and efforts to improve continue. By careful study of the various grand jury models in the United States, Korea has a good foundation in which to develop a grand jury model that would be most suitable to our nation. Specifically a model that would allow for optional grand jury indictments and where procedural rights are ensured.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 표성수, "영미 형사사법의 구조-그 가치에 대한 새로운 이해" 비봉출판사 2004

2 박형관, "영국과 미국의 수사와 기소에 관한 절차적 통제구조와 시사점" 한국형사소송법학회 12 (12): 71-102, 2020

3 옥선기, "수사절차상 국민참여제도에 대한 비교법적 고찰" 대검찰청 2008

4 유주성, "수사와 기소 분리를 위한 쟁점과 과제" 국회입법조사처 10 (10): 147-173, 2018

5 박세현, "미국의 기소배심 실무 연구" 법무연수원 24 : 2009

6 오경식, "미국의 기소대배심운영과 한국의 도입방안" 대검찰청 (28) : 1-30, 2010

7 조재현, "미국 대배심제의 기능적·조직적 모델구상과 운용성과에 관한 연구- 우리 검찰시민위원회의 발전방안에 관한 시사점을 중심으로 -" 한국부패학회 19 (19): 51-66, 2014

8 박철웅, "미국 기소배심 제도의 국내도입방안-미국 국민수사참여 모델 연구" 법무연수원 27 : 2012

9 백승민, "대배심제도에 관한 연구" 법학연구원 17 (17): 81-105, 2007

10 서보학, "글로벌 스탠다드에 부합하는 수사기소분리모델설정 및 형사소송법 개정안" 경찰청 2017

11 김태명, "검찰시민위원회 및 기소심사회 제도에 대한 비판적 고찰" 한국형사정책연구원 21 (21): 2010

12 이성기, "검사의 부당한 공소제기를 방지하기 위한 미국 기소대배심제(Grand Jury)의 수정적 도입에 관한 연구" 비교법학연구소 38 : 463-494, 2013

13 Leipold, Andrew D., "WHY GRAND JURIES DO NO(CANNOT)PROTECT THE ACCUSED" 80 : 260-, 1995

14 Brenner, Susan W., "The Voice of the Community : A Case for Grand Jury Independence" 3 : 67-, 1995

15 Platek, David F., "The Illinois Grand Jury Indictment : A Denial of Due Process" 12 : 319-, 1979

16 Doyle, Charles, "The Federal Grand Jury" Congressional Research Service 2015

17 Monia, Nino C., "THE FALL OF GRAND JURIES" 12 : 411-, 2020

18 Lettow, Rene E., "Reviving Federal Grand Jury Presentment" 103 : 1333-, 1994

19 Washbum, Kevin K., "Restoring The Grand Jury" 76 : 233-, 2008

20 Simmons, Ric, "ReExamining the Grand Jury: Is There Room for Democracy in the Criminal Justice System?" 82 : 1-, 2002

21 Levy, Leonard W., "Origins of Bill of Rights" Yale University Press 1999

22 Thomas, Suja A., "Missing American Jury" Cambridge University Press 2016

23 Decker, John F., "Legislating New Federalism : The Call For Grand Jury Reform In The States" 58 : 341-, 2005

24 Rosenberg, Benjamin E., "Indictments, Grand Juries, And Criminal Justice Reform" 48 : 81-, 2020

25 서창희, "Grand Jury 및 Immunity를 이용한 수사-미국법상 비협조적 참고인에대하여 진술을 강제하는 방법" 법무연수원 11 : 1995

26 Emerson, Deborah Day, "Grand Jury Reform: A Review of Key Issues" U.S. Department of Justice National institute of Justice 1983

27 National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, "Federal Grand Jury Reform Reports & Bill of Rights" 2000

28 Campbell, William J., "Eliminating Grand Jury" 64 : 174-, 1973

29 Vorenberg, James, "Decent Restraint of Prosecutorial Power" 94 : 1521-, 1981

30 Worrall, John L., "Criminal Procedure - From first Contact to Appeal" Peason 2015

31 McPeake, Robert, "Criminal Litigation and Sentencing" Oxford 2015

32 National Center for State Courts(NASC), "Center of Jury Studies, Reforming the Grand Jury Indicting Process: Recent Efforts to Improve Public Confidence in Cases Involving Police Use of Lethal Force" 2021

33 Kadish, Mark, "Behind the Locked Door of an American Grand Jury: Its History, Its Secrecy, and Its Process" 24 : 1-, 1996