Earticle

초록

영어

Since the function of accusation system is to protect people from receiving damages as a result of crime and ensure appropriate implementation of the judicial system, the accusation right of people should be recognized as a right. The criminal procedure law defines it as a right by specifying the right of appeal and arbitration to accuser and the right to receive notification from prosecutor. However, the practice of turning a case to be handled as civil case into criminal case through accusation, thereby causing emotional and material damages to the accused, and receiving exemption of indictment such as being cleared from suspicion after having wasted considerable investigative manpower and budget needs to be eradicated. The cause of such overuse of accusation can be found in the way of thinking of people that have become accustomed to the existing system that has not clearly distinguished civil case from criminal case. However, the bigger cause is the difficulty in collecting evidence through civil case, the difficulty of civil execution and the prosecution voluntarily taking on the role of arbitrator. In terms of the solutions to the overuse of accusation that have been proposed in legal and academic circles, the majority of them put the emphasis on restraining accusation through criminal law. However, in the sense that accusations will not decrease if solution through accusation is easier and more economical than solution through other systems, it is difficult to consider such proposed solutions as fundamental solutions. Contrary to existing discussion, the author has accordingly presented a discussion based on the notion that the increased efficiency of civil case and the restoration of trust of civil trial by people is the fundamental countermeasure to prevent overuse of accusation. To briefly summarize existing discussions, it has been proposed to expand the discovery system during civil suit procedure, and apply the hearsay rule for the written statement collected by investigative agency from accusation even for civil suit procedure to not recognize its admissibility to eliminate the motive of overuse of accusation for evidence collection in civil case, and drastically reduce judge's discretion in civil suit procedure to restore people's trust in civil trial, and supplement civil execution act to allow creditor that received irrevocable judgment to easily obtain satisfaction. In addition, contents that have not been mentioned in details in existing discussions by scholars were also discussed as countermeasures against the overuse of accusation. They are assertions on imposing cost to accuser in the case of exemption from indictment as a result of investigation from accusation, and abolishing the Personlichkeitsverletzngen implemented by the prosecution according to crime victim protection act to exclude the prosecution's arbitrator role in civil case.

한국어

지금까지 실무계나 학계에서 논의되어 온 남고소의 해소방안은 대부분 형사법적으로 고소 자체를 억제하는 측면이 강조되어 왔다. 그러나 고소로 인한 해결이 다른 제도를 통하여 해결하는 것보다 더 손쉽고 경제적이라면 고소사건이 줄어들 리 없다는 점에서 이러한 방안은 근본적인 해결책이라고 보기 어렵다. 여기에서 필자는 종래의 논의와는 다르게, 민사사건의 효율성 제고와 국민에 의한 민사재판의 신뢰회복을 통하여 민사소송으로 해결할 유인책을 제공하는 것이 남고소를 방지하는 근본적인 대책이라는 점에 착안하여 논의를 전개하였다. 즉 민사소송절차에서 증거개시제도를 확충하고, 고소에 의하여 수사기관이 수집한 진술서면에 대하여는 민사소송절차에도 전문법칙을 적용하여 원칙적으로 증거능력을 인정하지 않음으로써 민사사건의 증거수집을 위한 남고소의 동기를 차단하고, 민사소송절차에서 법관의 재량을 대폭 줄여 국민의 민사재판에 대한 신뢰를 회복하고, 확정판결을 받은 채권자가 용이하게 만족을 얻을 수 있도록 민사집행법을 보완하는 등의 제도개선이 필요하다는 점이다. 아울러 기존 학자들의 논의에서 자세히 언급되어 있지 않은 내용도 남고소의 대책으로 논의하였는데, 고소로 인한 수사결과 불기소처분을 한 경우에는 일정한 범위 내에서 고소인에게 비용을 부담시키고, 검찰의 민사사건의 조정자적 역할을 배제하기 위해서는 범죄피해자 보호법에 따라 검찰이 운영하는 형사조정제도를 폐지하여야 한다는 주장 등이 그것이다.

목차

Ⅰ. 서론
 Ⅱ. 민사사건에 대한 고소의 현황과 문제점
 Ⅲ. 민사사건에 대한 고소의 원인
 Ⅳ. 민사사건에 대한 고소의 대책
 Ⅴ. 결론
 참고문헌
 

키워드

저자

• 김재덕 [ Kim, Jae-Duk | 원광대학교 법학전문대학원 교수. ]

참고문헌

발행기관

간행물

표지보기 관심저널 등록

• 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