형사절차에 있어 성격증거의 편향성과 증명력 - 미국 증거법의 논의에 대한 분석을 중심으로 -

Character evidence must be prejudicial to participants of criminal process when it is dealt with very cautiously. In fact, character evidence will be problematic to the broader extent that the bill of rape shield law looks for its’ effect. Generally, the U.S. federal courts deals with the Article 412, 413 of the Federal Rule of Evidence deeply in relation with the Article 403 of the Rule. The decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, Olden v. Kentucky, in which the defendant’s case about the victim’s past record of sexual behavior was admitted to impeach the victim’s case, reflects the language of the Article 403 of the Federal Rule of Evidence. The requirements of specificity, similarity, numerosity, temporal proximity that is used to improve predictability and probative value look valuable to determine relevancy of an character evidence. Moreover, the fact that a past record of a crime of a witness in American evidence law can be admitted should be cautiously considered. Our criminal justice system does not have to consult the American approach that criminal records or wrong behaviors that are not related to credibility are still admissible for the purpose of impeachment. In addition, it is necessary to carefully examine and consider the rule that allows courts to admit a character evidence to prove intent, knowledge, and lack of mistake. It is because a intent of a criminal as the most important component of a criminal act is seriously related to the exclusionary rule of character evidence. Also, the requirements of specificity and similarity ought to be strictly satisfied to get admissibility of that type of character evidence.