미국 증권집단소송 사건 민사배심 평결에 관한 연구

The Ministry of Justice of Korea is planning to repeal the Securities-related Class Action Act and instead enact the Class Action Act. The Class Action bill plans to introduce several new systems that are not in the Securities-related Class Action Act. One of them is the participatory trial system. The participatory trial system is similar to, but somewhat different from, the US civil jury system. One difference is the form of verdict, among others. This Article collects and analyzes US securities class action that went to trial to help design the Korean participatory trial system in the Class Action bill. Of the US securities class action cases since the enactment of the PSLRA, at least 14 cases reached a verdict after trial. Of the 14 cases, 11 cases, that the author was able to collect the verdict forms were all based on special verdicts. This is because United States requires a special verdict in securities class action cases. This Article argues that a special verdict is required for the US securities class actions because the securities class action case is complicated. And it is difficult to expect the jury to calculate each class member’s damages. Considering the practice of the US securities class actions and the purpose clause of the Korean Class Action bill, which is not aimed at deterrence, this paper argues that it is appropriate that the Class Action bill does not grant binding force to the verdict of the jury. In addition, this Article argues that the method of communication between judges and juries under the Class Action bill is also appropriate in light of US civil jury practice. However, this Article proposes that the bill requires the opinions of judges to the jury be recorded in order to remove the appearance that judges made an unfair influence on the jury.