검･경 수사권조정에 대한 비판적 분석: 2020. 2. 4.자 개정 형사소송법 및 검찰청법의 내용을 중심으로

Contents of adjustments of investigation power between the prosecution and police included followings. ① To abolish the command of investigation by the prosecutors, by establishing the relations between the prosecution and police as that of mutual cooperation ② To assign the right to close investigations to police in the first place by acknowledging the authority of police not to forward a case to the prosecution ③ To reduce the scope of direct investigation of the prosecution on a large scale ④ Should prosecutors dismiss diverse warrants applied by judicial police officers, appeal of dissatisfaction to this can be done to Warrants Deliberation Committee established at High Prosecutors Office ⑤ Requirements for admissibility of evidence for protocols of examination of suspects prepared by prosecutors to be same as those prepared by judicial police officers. The reason of the suggestion for this revision was explained generally to provide people with more human rights-friendly environment based on mutual check and balance between the prosecution and police by establishing cooperative relations between them. That said, criminal procedures changed in a far more complicated way compared with the existing ones, and so inconveniences are expected to arise from the standpoint of people. Along the way, means to control investigation of judicial police has been weakened, resulting in the need of preparation of tools to properly check the increased rights of police. Based on the current circumstances related with adjustments of investigation power and critical thoughts as such, the study sought to conduct a critical analysis, by largely dividing the issues emerged at the revised law into abolition of the command of prosecutors prior to forwarding the cases in principle, recognition of the right of judicial police officers to close investigations in the first place for unforwarded cases and reduction of the scope of direct investigation by prosecutors.