메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 외법논집 외법논집 제33권 제4호
발행연도
2009.1
수록면
455 - 476 (22page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The Supreme Court revised the Korea law of criminal suit and prescribed 'illegality collection exclusion of evidence law' in 2 of the 308 group. The Supreme Court changed. The admissibility of evidence of the evidence collected by the investigation in which it violates law is not recognized. Because of accompanying the breach of the fundamental human rights, in order to be according to on the warrant attention, the object legal disposition prescribes. Accordingly our Supreme Court denied the admissibility of evidence of the evidence collected by the procedure of violating law in the event in which we look at. It is encouraging that it denies the admissibility of evidence of the evidence collected by the procedure changing the attitude in which it recognizes the difference of the admissibility of evidence of the statement evidence and ratio statement evidence in a convention in the object legal disposition and in which it violates law. But in this event, it can not help is pointing out if the Supreme Court changes a position that there is the procedural several points. If it is the collection of evidence violated to the warrant attention, it is unable to be appropriate with first to view as the evidence in which it immediately violates law. It is rightly decided even about coming under a seizure, and the proprietary in which it can search without a warrant that there had to be a review Because it was clear to be the point of time of time when the secretary of the governor of Jeju attempts to the destruction of evidence, that should be discussed with second. As to this thing, when being the flagrant delict and seizing the evidence in which an accomplice possesses, a secretary has to inquire the procedural problem about in which the exception of the warrant attention is not recognized. Lastly, our court said to be not only the important crime but it repeats the review about the standards our court looks at. Because, a qualification as the public official is deprived due to the pronouncement of the prison sentence in which it is quite light unlike the dissimilar crime in the case of this law and the proper comparison cannot become the general crime and the that it formally compares thing. In this kind of a reason, the determination of our Supreme Court tries to point out that there is the problem. Theministers secretary is allowed that it confiscates as the flagrant delict of the obstruction of justice through destruction of evidence without a warrant. It says accordingly to be the investigation in which it violates law. This kind of a verdict thinks that there is the procedural problem.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (26)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0