민사소송에서 신속절차 도입에 대한 연구 - 사법접근성 향상의 관점에서

As society becomes increasingly advanced and complex, the legal order has likewise developed in a more sophisticated manner. With the number of legal professionals growing each year and their continued efforts to develop legal theories and advanced litigation strategies aimed at prevailing in court, the number of civil cases filed has steadily increased, and the issues presented in such cases have become more complex. Meanwhile, since the introduction of information technology (IT), the speed of administrative processes across society has improved dramatically, fostering a perception that civil litigation proceeds relatively slowly and further intensifying social demands for speedy trials. From the perspective of dispute resolution theory, discussions on access to justice have proposed the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) as one means of enabling all individuals to utilize the justice system on an equal footing in order to achieve justice. In judicial practice, courts have sought to promote fairness, speed, and cost-efficiency through the active exercise of judges’ case management and procedural control. In addition, advances in IT and artificial intelligence (AI) have led to the establishment and expansion of electronic litigation systems and online dispute resolution (ODR) platforms, aimed at enhancing procedural speed and economy and improving access to justice. Through these developments in dispute resolution theory, judicial case management practices, and the digitalization of the dispute resolution environment, visible progress has been made in improving the speed of civil litigation. At the same time, many countries have explored institutional mechanisms within civil procedure to enhance speed and cost-efficiency, and have introduced simplified procedures for small civil disputes. Beyond such small-claims procedures, measures have also been devised to enable expedited adjudication in cases not subject to simplified proceedings. One such measure is the expedited procedure, often referred to as a fast track or expedited trial program. In the United States, some courts have established fast-track procedures within civil litigation, allowing parties to obtain expedited adjudication. More recently, Japan amended its Code of Civil Procedure to introduce a new procedural framework the statutorily time-limited trial procedure which permits the conclusion of proceedings within a prescribed period upon the consent of the parties, with the primary objective of expediting civil trials. With this background, this study examines the ideals pursued by expedited procedures as a means of achieving speedy trials and assesses their effectiveness, with the aim of exploring ways to enhance the speed of civil litigation in Korea. To this end, it considers the significance of procedural speed in civil adjudication from the perspective of access to justice, examines the operation and criticisms of fast-track procedures in the United States, and conducts a comparative analysis of the background and critiques surrounding the statutorily time-limited trial procedure introduced through recent amendments to Japan’s Code of Civil Procedure. Access to justice, which serves as the theoretical foundation of judicial reform, presents certain expectations regarding the introduction of expedited procedures, while at the same time calling for caution concerning their structural limitations. Expedited procedures must be designed so as to function appropriately within the Korean civil litigation system, without infringing upon the parties’ constitutional right to a trial and while ensuring procedural fairness. To this end, it is necessary to move beyond quantitative indicators such as duration or cost and to form a social consensus on procedural speed that enables an adequate civil trial.