위법수집 비진술증거의 증거배제에 관한 대법원 판결의 흐름과 전망

Article 17 amended the Criminal Procedure Code Amendment exclusion of evidence collected by law you have the prestigious Law Article 2,Section 308 was established. Statements for evidence of illegal gathering evidence about the Exclusionary Rule applies without exception, the opinion of the match, despite the evidence, not statements about the guarantees of due process and substantive truth is found in that case that the combination of ideas based on the coverage and determine there are also differences of opinion. From this study are as follows: ‘What statement-evidence, but this principle is fully applied, non statement-evidence for the application of this principle is limited?’ Statement in evidence, illegal gathering of evidence concerning the application of the Exclusionary Rule Cases theory can not be materialized in the actual case is fictional. Thus, the constitutional principles of due process of law faithfully Illegally Collected Evidence coverage and exclusion criteria should be interpreted. In the trial that evidence gathered illegally by prohibiting the use of crime control and investigation activities may be presented in the correct direction of the investigation. This people’s freedom and rights are guaranteed. Illegal in the process of collecting evidence, if any,constitutionally guaranteed rights of criminals are to be violated. Thus, in the process of collection of evidence or any evidence, if any, illegal to prohibit the use interpretation is faithful to the spirit of the Criminal Procedure Code. Therefore, the principles and practices that are related to research in depth should be about. However, proof of a crime, if that is not related to the application of these principles shall be excluded. The primary evidence collected by law enforcement agencies and the states collect evidence against the law, but the primary evidence is not the only evidence of the fact that appeals, as well as the relevance Based on this, or does not have a separate primary evidence in the proceedings regardless of the content secondary evidence of the defendant made a statement is difficult to acknowledge.