• 검색어에 아래의 연산자를 사용하시면 더 정확한 검색결과를 얻을 수 있습니다.
  • 검색연산자
검색연산자 기능 검색시 예
() 우선순위가 가장 높은 연산자 예1) (나노 (기계 | machine))
공백 두 개의 검색어(식)을 모두 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (나노 기계)
예2) 나노 장영실
| 두 개의 검색어(식) 중 하나 이상 포함하고 있는 문서 검색 예1) (줄기세포 | 면역)
예2) 줄기세포 | 장영실
! NOT 이후에 있는 검색어가 포함된 문서는 제외 예1) (황금 !백금)
예2) !image
* 검색어의 *란에 0개 이상의 임의의 문자가 포함된 문서 검색 예) semi*
"" 따옴표 내의 구문과 완전히 일치하는 문서만 검색 예) "Transform and Quantization"
쳇봇 이모티콘
ScienceON 챗봇입니다.
궁금한 것은 저에게 물어봐주세요.

논문 상세정보

형사증거법상 보충적 규정인 제314조에 대한 소고

Study on Article 314 of the Criminal Evidentiary Laws

법학연구 no.37 , 2010년, pp.237 - 263  

Article 310 Section 2 of the Criminal Procedure Law fundamentally denies evidentiary capacity of hearsay evidence. By and through this rule, it assures defendant’s right to fair trial by strict application of public trial doctrine in direct trial system and deny hearsay evidence so as to assure the defendant’s right to cross examine.But if direct trial system and hearsay rule is appliedtoo strictly without any exceptions, it may cause hindrance to fair trial, which is the most important task, and materialization of judicial justice due to interference of speedy trial by waiting for the witness to be appear in front of the judge which will cause delay in trial and interfere with substantial fact finding by disturbing the use of evidentiaryevidence. Under the foregoing considerations, there are needs to have exceptions to the use of hearsay evidence which gives the reasons for the amended article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Law.It is necessaryto analyze the interpretation and standards by studying the legislative intent and the scope of application of article 314.By analysis of case laws which ruled on article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Law, it is clear that the courts are applying article 314 in conformity to the legislative intent. But, broader application of article 314 for substantial fact finding in the hands of the police is still regulated by the judiciary in real life. The conflict in the scope of application of article 314 has been revealed through the amendment process of ‘other corresponding grounds’.The sole solution to this conflict is to prepare detailed standards. The fundamental solution will be to state individual requisites by detailed legislation such as death, disease, living abroad, and missing person and so on, but actualization of such is unlikely considering the hardship in its legislation. It follows from the foregoing that it is necessary to set detailed standards of article 314 based on the analysis of detailed case laws. Thus, rather than after-the-fact regulation through the case laws, it is essential to set detailed standards within the boundaries which will not harm direct trial system so as to allow substantial fact finding. One must be aware that not only the simplistic criminal law approach but also statistical approach which will include the detailed specific gravity of the cases whichapplied article 314 out of all the criminal cases and the contribution of evidence provided by and through article 314 and so on.

참고문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문의 참고문헌 없음

이 논문을 인용한 문헌 (0)

  1. 이 논문을 인용한 문헌 없음


원문 PDF 다운로드

  • 원문 PDF 정보가 존재하지 않습니다.

원문 URL 링크

  • 원문 URL 링크 정보가 존재하지 않습니다.
상세조회 0건 원문조회 0건

DOI 인용 스타일