Incumbent judge, first critique of probation…”Criminal justice system running backwards” :: Empathy Media Newsis News Agency ::

Article Summary

Han Yun-ok, Chief Judge of Ulsan District Court, contributed to the Law Newspaper
“‘Investigation’ is ‘means’, ‘indictment’ is ‘purpose’… The recent attempts to completely separate investigation and prosecution, which form one body with the nature of means and ends, have been found nowhere in developed countries. Can not”
“I sincerely hope that our criminal justice system, which is running backwards, can move in the right direction.”

[서울=뉴시스]Han Yun-ok, chief judge of the Ulsan District Court. *Resale and DB prohibited


[서울=뉴시스]Intern Reporter Park Seon-min = The incumbent chief judge publicly criticized the Democratic Party’s enforcement of ‘check-and-run’ (completely stripped of the prosecution’s investigative powers). It is the first time that the chief judge of the front-line court in charge of the trial has publicly criticized the prosecution.

On the 2nd, Ulsan District Court Chief Judge Han Yun-ok posted an article titled ‘The Truth of Prosecution’ in the ‘Law Newspaper’.

A judge said, “The purpose of the investigation is to make a legal judgment on whether to prosecute, that is, whether to pass a specific crime charge to trial.” There should be a minimum investigation for this.”

“On the other hand, if there are any deficiencies in the existing investigation results through legal review, of course, additional investigations for prosecution should be conducted,” he explained.

A judge said, “Recently, there has been an unprecedented attempt to separate the ‘means’ and ‘ends’ that can only be done in such an organically connected manner under the criminal justice system, centering on a specific political party, and to disperse them among the two state institutions that are in fact in tension. Yes,” he said, referring to the Democratic Party’s enforcement of inspections.

“The concern here is that the prosecution’s direct investigation issue and the question of the existence of the investigative power itself are completely separate issues, but it seems that such an attempt is being made under the wrong perception of this aspect.”

He continued, “Even though it is not a somewhat authoritative expression of ‘investigation command’ like ours, if the prosecutor reviews the police investigation process and results and instructs the police to conduct complementary investigations, the police will of course do so in deciding whether to indict or maintain the prosecution. The practice to be implemented is commonly confirmed in developed countries,” he wrote.

“The prosecution in advanced countries refrains from direct investigation in order to be faithful to their supervisory authority and conducts investigations to determine whether to prosecute and maintain public prosecution through an institution called the police. No,” he added, adding, “I can’t find any attempt to completely separate investigation and prosecution, which are united by the nature of means and ends, as in Korea, nowhere in developed countries.”

A judge feared that if the Prosecutor’s Office Act was passed, “the prosecutor’s right to prosecute will become an ineffective authority.”

He continued, “‘The purpose and the means are reversed’ and ‘To enable unrestricted police investigations that are not bound by the prosecutor’s legal judgment on whether to prosecute under the criminal justice system, which restricts the exercise of the enormous power of the state investigative power only within the limits of the law’ ‘Unleashing the sharp knife of investigative power without guidance or reins to the world while at the same time creating an institutional vacuum for the serious crimes of those in power previously responsible for the prosecution’, they call it ‘reform’.”

He continued, “The function of controlling the investigation process, which inevitably entails limiting the people’s basic rights, by cutting out the investigative power, which is an essential element in determining whether or not to be prosecuted, is also As long as it has already been punished by the previous revision of the law, there will be no means of checking to enforce the principle of due process, which is a constitutional principle, in the police investigation process,” he said.

A judge said, “The gap between the ‘means’ and the ‘purpose’ of the Korean criminal justice system is gradually growing.

Finally, “When the National Assembly exercises its legislative powers, the entire deliberation process, including legislative investigation, which is an essential act for decision-making, is handed over to other institutions that are in tension with the National Assembly, and the National Assembly does not intervene in or direct the deliberative process, but only decides. If asked to do so, can the legislative power be able to function properly?” he wrote.

On the other hand, the Democratic Party of Korea decided to handle the bill of scrutiny at the plenary session of the National Assembly on the 3rd.

◎ Sympathetic press news [email protected]


Source: 뉴시스 속보 by www.newsis.com.

*The article has been translated based on the content of 뉴시스 속보 by www.newsis.com. If there is any problem regarding the content, copyright, please leave a report below the article. We will try to process as quickly as possible to protect the rights of the author. Thank you very much!

*We just want readers to access information more quickly and easily with other multilingual content, instead of information only available in a certain language.

*We always respect the copyright of the content of the author and always include the original link of the source article.If the author disagrees, just leave the report below the article, the article will be edited or deleted at the request of the author. Thanks very much! Best regards!