배심제 평의의 합리성에 관한 연구 - 국민참여재판에서의 그림자 배심 평의 분석

This study examined the rationality of jury deliberation by employing direct observation of the shadow jury deliberation and conducting surveys on shadow jurors of 20 real jury trials in South Korea. Six factors of the rationality of jury deliberation were: (1) comprehension of the jury instruction, (2) evidence-based review, (3) factual focus, (4) systematic participation, (5) exclusion of influence, and (6) exclusion of emotion. This study also examined the correlation between deliberation rationality and the jurors’ satisfaction of the deliberation and degree of the change of their perception of the fairness of the court. First, the observations reveal that the shadow jurors mostly understood the judge’s instruction, understood and recalled the evidences discussed during the trials. The jurors also paid close attention during the court proceedings and actively participated in the deliberation. In addition, the moderator played his or her role in equally allocating the opportunity to talk among the jurors, and the deliberation processes tended to be open and democratic. On the other hand, the degree of evidence-based review seems to be relatively low as the jurors tended to vote very early rather than waiting until they fully discussed the facts and evidence of the case, although they did pay attention to the court proceedings. There were quite a few proceedings where one or two jurors dominated discussions. Jurors also acknowledged that their emotions worked in the way of making decisions. The observations suggest there are rooms for improvement of the jury deliberation. What is more encouraging is that the ‘citizen jury’ group did not seem inferior to the ‘participatory jury’ group in terms of the rationality of jury deliberation even though the participatory jurors were younger, more educated, and more interested in the jury system to begin with. In addition, the level of deliberation rationality was found to be positively correlated with the jurors’ satisfaction of the deliberation and the degree of changes of their perception of the fairness of the court.