Earticle

현재 위치 Home

연구논문

간접사실에 관한 자백
Confession to Indirect Facts

첫 페이지 보기
  • 발행기관
    원광대학교 법학연구소 바로가기
  • 간행물
    원광법학 KCI 등재 바로가기
  • 통권
    제26집 제1호 (2010.03)바로가기
  • 페이지
    pp.373-396
  • 저자
    이정환
  • 언어
    한국어(KOR)
  • URL
    https://www.earticle.net/Article/A117707

원문정보

초록

영어
Defined as a party's depositions including the deposition about facts to be identical with other party's assertion and to be disadvantageous for him, the deposition to acknowledge other party's assertion which is disadvantageous to him, the deposition to acknowledge other party's assertion true and the deposition not to argue with other party in any condition during oral defence and defence preparation procedure.
When these confessions are once established, on the one hand, they bind court and prohibit to use the fact contrary to them as basic facts for a judgement. It is the binding for the original intention of confession, the second theses of Closing Note. So the fact confessed need not to be proved, as a result of it, inquiry is promoted. On the other, if a confession is established, the fact confessed may become in fact spurious certificate, so other party may forget an aggressive activity for collecting evidences to the facts confessed. The reliability from other party should be protected.
Accordingly, a confessor is bound by it and can not freely retrieve it unlike simple facts. it is the binding to a party, self-binding. The effect of confession reaches to even the inquiry of high court. Additionally, the confession in justice is acknowledged only in the procedure to adopt Closing Note, and is not acknowledged in the procedure to adopt Attention to detect misconduct.
The necessary requirements to establish confessions can be summarized as follows ① a confess should be made on the concrete facts ② a confession should be a deposition done during defence or defence preparation procedure. additionally ③ a confession should be identical with
other party's assertion on the facts ④ a confession should be a deposition
to be disadvantageous for the confessor. In the above 4 requirements to be
a confession, in the light of interpretation, problematic issues are specially
① and ④. Regarding the essential condition of ①, there are issues about
whether the object of confession is limited only to key facts or to include
indirect fact and accessorial fact, and about whether those confessions on
right or legal relationships except for the above can be the object of
confession, Regarding the essential condition of ④, in case of
disadvantageous deposition to the confessor. what is an actual disadvantage
to the confessor.
In this regards, as the object of confession is a concrete fact, principally
a minor premise of legal syllogism, the existence, contents, interpretation
about a rule of thumb and legislation, that judiciary has to know well, can
not be a confession in justice though there could be some conflicts between
parties,
For the matter about what confession means, it goes without saying that
key fact can be an object of confession through the things that the
binding for confession is based on Closing note and it is reasonable to
apply Closing note to key fact at least. But a common view and a judicial
precedent negate the binding of indirect fact which needs confirmation on
the key facts, though both party's depositions are same. On the other hand,
the binding of confession is acknowledged by the petition through the
establishment of documentary evidence specially, which is accepted as a key
fact, among accessorial facts. But some theories claim strongly to
acknowledge the confessions for indirect facts and accessorial facts
recently.
So this study tries to define the concept and classification of key fact and indirect fact in advance, and the binding on the original intention of
confession for indirect fact, and the binding to the confessor for researching
the issues about whether the fact to be a object of confession is limited to
key fact or indirect fact is also included for the requirements to establish
confessions.

목차

Ⅰ. 문제의 제기
 Ⅱ. 주요사실과 간접사실의 구별
  1. 서
  2. 주요사실과 간접사실의 개념
  3. 주요사실과 간접사실의 구별의 논쟁
  4. 소결
 Ⅲ. 간접사실 자백의 법원에 대한 구속력
  1. 구속력 부정설
  2. 구속력 부정설에 대한 비판
  3. 구속력 긍정설
 Ⅳ. 간접사실 자백의 당사자에 대한 구속력
  1. 구속력 부정설
  2. 구속력 긍정설
 Ⅴ. 결어
 참고문헌
 

키워드

Confession in the Justice Indirect Acts The Binding for Confession Key Facts Closing Note.

저자

  • 이정환 [ Lee, Jeong-Hawn | 벽성대학 부동산행정과 강사. ]

참고문헌

자료제공 : 네이버학술정보

간행물 정보

발행기관

  • 발행기관명
    원광대학교 법학연구소 [THE LAW RESEARCH INSTITUTE WONKWANG UNIVERSTIY]
  • 설립연도
    1961
  • 분야
    사회과학>법학
  • 소개
    법에 대한 이론적 · 실제적 연구를 수행하고 그 결과를 발표하여 한국과 지역사회의 법률문화의 발전에 기여함을 목적으로 설립되었으며 법학일반이론과 법학교육방법 등의 연구와 법률구조안내 및 상담을 한다

간행물

  • 간행물명
    원광법학 [Journal of Law research]
  • 간기
    계간
  • pISSN
    1598-429X
  • eISSN
    2508-4526
  • 수록기간
    1962~2026
  • 등재여부
    KCI 등재
  • 십진분류
    KDC 360 DDC 340

이 권호 내 다른 논문 / 원광법학 제26집 제1호

    피인용수 : 0(자료제공 : 네이버학술정보)

    함께 이용한 논문 이 논문을 다운로드한 분들이 이용한 다른 논문입니다.

      페이지 저장