경찰관직무집행법 개정안의 불심검문규정에 관한 헌법적 문제

This paper examines the constitutional issues on the police stop and frisk in the Police Duty Bill pending in the Administration and Safety Committee and searches for the alternatives. When the police laws contains the proper and concrete regulations to protect the safety of the citizen, the function of the police to protect the basic human rights of the citizens would be liable. It makes the Legislative responsible for the fulfillment of the police's own duties. We could not estimate this bill as a big progress to reflect the discussions on the writ issues and clearness of the terms of the regulations. Although the bill reflects the advise of the National Human Rights Committee to strengthen the voluntariness of the stop and frisk, the problems mentioned before the amendment would not seem to be cured for the reason that it would make the stop and frisk useless in substance. Rather, the stop and frisk regulation would be expected to be put in order when it is stated as an exceptional condition of the writ rule after the writ mandatory regulations and shows the concrete cases. In additions to that, the scattered police regulations needs to be structured systematically and to be considered clear and concrete relations with the writ cases after strict study. The urgent police function needs to be regulated to minimize the danger to infringe the human rights by concrete and clear terms to protect people's rights and make them to predict the police actions. This is the very own duty of the Legislative and the State.