공동피고인 진술의 법률관계― 증거법적 영역을 중심으로 ―

If we give it a admissibility of evidence and whether it satisfy the necessary conditions, the authenticity criteria and used possibility as the supporting evidence are very important issue in criminal evidence areas in light of the specificity of the co-defendant`s statement. To solve the this problem, the interpretation of the current triangulation Criminal Evidence Act as co-defendants in the case law and practical perspective may as well do as. Therefore in the testimony, if they are accomplice co-defendants accused, one`s statements are the admissibility of evidence to another`s crime, but not his co-defendants accused, he should interrogate as witness. And on the confession of co-accused and accomplice in front of a prosecutor, the Criminal Procedure Article 312/4 is equipped with. On the confession of co-defendant as a accomplice in front of a police officer, the Criminal Procedure Article 312/3 is equipped with, therefore if the defendant intent to deny the contents of the other defendant, but he is not accomplice, the 312/4 is equipped with. I agree that co-defendant`s confession is likely to use the supporting evidence to other`s confession. However, in light of ever pass on the responsibility of co-defendant statements tend to be virtually guaranteed opposit interrogation. even though this may be a confession of an accomplice corroboration is required to be carried out very carefully is the credibility judgments. In case of need, legislate the necessary separation of argue