당연히 증거능력이 인정되는 서류 －특히 형사소송법 제315조를 중심으로－

In the principle of evidence, nothing on hearsay is admitted as evidence, (Criminal Procedure Article 310 Provision 2), but in certain conditions, it can be exceptionally capable of being admitted evidence (Article 311-Article 316). Generally, written statements made other than the court or investigative agency may be admitted as evidence only if ground of truthfulness is recognized. And on the other hand, without asking a regular feature of certain requirements regarding certain documents, the Article 315 of the Criminal Procedure is to acknowledge the power of evidence for the document. Of course, the documents in the Article 315 could be admitted as evidence in accordance with the Article 313 and 314, but particularly in case that questioning the author as witness is inappropriate, together with high credibility, the need is recognized in assumption of truth to acknowledge evidence, in contrary to general statements. In particular, unlike written verification in civil rights of Article 315 Provision 1 and business regular documents of Article 315 Provision 2, it is controversial what documents are involved in the Provision 3 of Article 315, some other documents in the general regulation forms, but regardless of the crime it is deem to be usually written documents like provision 1 and 2 of the Article 315. Therefore, as all documents such as accomplice protocols of other hearings, interrogation of legality for confinement protocols, investigation warranty protocols, etc are relevant to criminal facts, instead of admitting power of evidence unconditionally under provision 3 of the Article 315, it is desirable to grant the power of evidence in the rigorous requirements of the Article 313 Provision 1.