형사소송법상 감정제도에 관한 몇 가지 고찰

Consequently upon establishing trialcentrism direct hearing and oral statement are being emphasized, therethrough the importance of trial statement becomes critical, but out of court obtaining material (real) evidences is making an appearance as a critical assignment. In the process of obtaining material evidences application of scientific techniques has increased and expert’s opinion plays an significant role in criminal procedure as a result. Existing Criminal Procedure Act doesn’t define the prerequisite and procedure of hearing expert’s opinion sufficiently and leaves it to discretion of criminal justice authorities. As a result people has not so much confidence in expert’s opinion. Especially After implementation of system of civil participation in criminal trials trialcentrism requires that civil participants (members of jury) understand the fact of criminal case through oral statements of participants. but they have not a sufficient ability to understand contents of specialized expert’s report. this circumstance indicates that the court must screen the admissibility of expert’s report as hearsay evidence carefully and by direction of litigation and explanation to the members induce jury to have no prejudice against expert’s opinion. And before the verdict members of jury must have a sufficient information about process and result of appraisement by experts.