수사권 조정에 따른 수사종결의 쟁점과 대안 -법해석학적 의미와 입법적 대안을 중심으로

In 2018, the coordination of investigative authority was promoted as a national task to reform power organizations. The revised current Criminal Procedure Act recognizes the police’s primary investigative power and the police’s power to terminate investigations while reducing the prosecution’s power to initiate direct investigations. One reason for the reform is that the police must have autonomy in the investigation while the prosecution’s power to initiate investigations must be abolished in accordance with the principle of separation of powers by remaining firm in the role of judicial control. The police’s power to terminate the investigation, introduced through the adjustment of the investigative power, could be viewed as a limited and tentative power, not a complete power to terminate the investigation. Accordingly, various control procedures are stipulated internally and externally for the police’s power to proceed with the investigation and terminate the investigation. However, their limitations have been pointed out in various aspects. For example, there are no rules governing in case the police refuse the prosecution’s request for a reinvestigation. This study focuses on legal interpretation and legislative policy issues related to the controls on the police’s power to terminate the investigation. It points to interpretive issues such as suspension of investigation, ambiguity in who is entitled to submit objections to the police’s non-transfer decisions, exclusion of duties, or the dispositions of disciplinary actions. Also, this study reviews legislative policy issues such as how to supplement the controls on the police’s non-transfer decision or the need for temporary measures in the prosecutor’s request for an investigation of the police’s transfer decision, and the suggestion for the permanent establishment of the investigation deliberation committee.