2024년도 형사소송법 판례 회고

Review of the Criminal Procedure Precedents of the Korean Supreme Court in 2024

2024년에도 형사소송법의 해석․적용에 관하여 다수의 대법원판결이 선고되었다. 이 가운데 ‘대법원 주요판결’과 ‘종합법률정보’에서 검색한 판결 중 전원합의체 판결을 포함하여 중요하다고 생각한 판결을 대상으로 검토하고자 한다. 형사소송법과 관련하여 2024년에 선고된 전원합의체 판결은 1건인바, 그것은 형사소송법 제33조 제1항 제1호가 정한 필요적 국선변호인 선정사유인 ‘구속’의 의미를 종전 판례보다 넓게 해석한 대법원 2024.5.23. 선고 2021도6357 전원합의체 판결이다. 또한 2024년에도 전자정보에 대한 압수와 관련하여 중요한 판결이 다수 선고되었고, 공소장변경의 시기에 관한 의미 있는 판결도 있었다. 이 글에서는 전원합의체 판결을 검토(Ⅱ)한 후 수사와 공소제기(Ⅲ), 재판절차(증거와 상소)(Ⅳ) 그리고 그 밖의 판결(Ⅴ) 순으로 살펴보았다.

This paper examines the Criminal Procedure Precedents of the Korean Supreme Court in 2024. I describe in chapter 1 the issues of the Supreme Court Judgment 2024.5.23. 2021do6357 en banc(hereinafter referred to as the ‘en banc’) and the overall order of review. In Chapter 2, I review the decision of the en banc that broadly interpret the meaning of 'detention,' which is a necessary reason for appointing a public defender as stipulated in Article 33, Paragraph 1, Item 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act, compared to previous case law. I believe that dissenting opinion is more persuasive when considering the effects of detention, its units, and the effects of appointing a lawyer. In Chapter 3, I dealt with rulings related to investigations and prosecutions. Regarding investigations, I examined the legality of covert recordings by law enforcement agencies, whether it was lawful to re-seize items that were not immediately returned under a warrant, the legality of additional seizures of copies based on a warrant, the execution of search and seizure warrants and third-party assistance, the legality of procedures for executing search and seizure warrants on minors, the voluntary submission of information storage media copied by a third party(victim), the participation rights and the scope of seizure of articles which has been discarded. With respect to prosecutions, I looked into the rulings concerning limitations on re-prosecution after a dismissal of charges. In Chapter 4, which addressed the rulings related to trial procedures, I examined the obligation to acknowledge reduced facts, the temporal limitations for changing the indictment, the witness qualifications of co-defendants, the admissibility of evidence for files secretly recorded by parents of elementary school students, the admissibility of evidence for video recorded CD showing the victim's statement analysis process prepared by a statement analysis expert, and the probative value of the defendant's statements recorded in the criminal mediation record. Finally, in Chapter 5, I discussed the interpretation of search warrants related to mobile phone seizures, the capacity of participants such as suspects, residents, and neighbors in the execution of search and seizure warrants, and the probative value of records of interrogations of accomplices prepared by prosecutors and judicial police officers.