형사소송법 제312조 제1항의 개정에 따른 수사와 공판 실무의 예상되는 변화와 바람직한 운영 방안

The revision of Article 312 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act in 2020 means more in terms of strengthening trial-centeredness beyond the meaning of equalization of the requirements for the recognition of evidence capabilities of the suspect-interrogation protocol prepared by prosecutor and judicial policeman on abolishing prosecutor's command right to judicial policeman and cooperative relationship regulations between prosecutor and judicial policeman. And it is expected to have a greater influence on investigative agencies and court practices. Attempts to revise to the contents demanding requirements of the defendant or lawyer’s ‘content recognition’ regarding the evidence capabilities of the suspect- interrogation protocol prepared by prosecutor were already made when Criminal Procedure Act which aimed at overcoming the harmful effects of the trial of documents and strengthening trial-centeredness was revised in 2007, but it was not revised due to opposition from the prosecution in the legislative process, only the investigator's testimony system was introduced which was discussed on the premise of revising evidence capabilities of the suspect-interrogation protocol prepared by prosecutor. But a legal system for the transition from the trial of documents to trial-centeredness was further established by this revision of Article 312 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. In this thesis, author studied the contents of the revision of Article 312 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the evidence capabilities of the suspect-interrogation protocol about accomplice prepared by prosecutor under the revised Act, and expected changes and desirable operation measures in investigation and trial practices under the amendment Article 312 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act. And in studying expected changes and desirable operation measures in investigation and trial practices under the amendment Article 312 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act author focused on investigator’s testimony. Furthermore, author studied whether independent evidence capabilities for video recordings can be recognized under the interpretation of the current law and whether it is desirable to introduce the recognition of independent evidence capabilities for video recordings as legislative theories for the discovery of true facts and quick and efficient trials under the situation that the suspect-interrogation protocol which the evidence capabilities had been recognized under eased requirements even if the defendant denies the contents has become incapable of evidence only by the defendant's contents denying. Author presented an opinion that it is reasonable to judge the evidence capabilities by Article 312 (4) regarding the evidence capabilities of the suspect-interrogation protocol about accomplice under the amended Act. And author presented an opinion that it will be necessary to run a practical operation so that the trial, including evidence investigation, can be conducted in the court, away from the nostalgia to convenience and efficiency of the document trial, and the investigator's testimony should be activated and operated as a universal method of evidence under the situation that the provisions of the evidence capabilities of the suspect-interrogation protocol prepared by prosecutor have been revised and the investigator testimony system has been introduced in order to strengthen trial-centeredness. Furthermore, author presented an opinion that it is not possible to recognize the independent evidence capabilities for video recordings according to the interpretation of the current Criminal Procedure Act and legislative theory about recognition of independent evidence capabilities for video recordings is also undesirable from a point of view of the purpose of the revised 2007 and 2020 Criminal Procedure Act and practical meaning of trial-centeredness.