이 게시판은 RSS와 엮인글이 가능합니다.
로그인을 하시면 댓글을 쓰실 수 있습니다..
* 광고성 글은 바로 삭제되며, 민주주의법학연구회의 설립취지에 어긋나는 글은 삭제 또는 다른 게시판으로 이동될 수 있습니다.
행정상 진술거부권과 그 제한 / 박지현
원문 내용 공개(PDF 파일 등)는 민주법학 통권 제34호 발간 후에 이루어집니다.
민주법학 통권 제33호는 온라인서점 등에서 구입하실 수 있습니다.
민주법학 통권 제32호까지의 원문 내용은 본 자료실에서 확인하실 수 있습니다.
행정상 진술강제, 공적 기록의무, 행정조사, 진술거부권
The Right to Silence and Possible Restrictions on it in Administrative Sphere
Juris Doctor, Seoul National University
The right to silence(“right not to give statements”, literally in Korean Constitution) in the administrative procedures is somewhat different from that in criminal procedures. It does not demand the pre-interrogation warnings, and can be exercised only by positive invocation(not by mere silence). This characteristics are of the right in ‘usual statement-compulsion in the administrative sphere’(the 1st type).
The usual statement-compulsions(1st type) in the administrative sphere do not violate the right to silence for the reason that the purposes of those are evidently administrational(regulative) and not penal. The individuals who are demanded to report something for a regulative purpose and at the risk of self-incrimination in particular circumstances can freely invoke the right. The report- or notice-duties in tax laws, the Securities and Exchange Act, the Bankruptcy Act, foreigner registration, and at traffic accidents can be regarded to go into this type.
The second type is the ‘unconstitutional administrative statement-compulsion.’ The related procedures are regarded as ‘substantial criminal procedures’which assume the similitude of administrative procedures but aim to gather criminal evidences. The sanction-provisions to disobediences to this kind of report-duties should be judged invalid and the fruits of those procedures can not used in later criminal procedures. Into this type can be sorted the report-duties in the Monopoly Act and the Security Observation Act.
The 3rd type is the sphere of justifiable restrictions to the right in the administrative sphere, namely ‘required record exception.’ The regulations of this type are construed as laying duties to report both legal and illegal activities, and could be justified through balancing approach. For instances of this type can be mentioned the record- or report-duties in the Public Election Act, of office workers of corporations of entities, of licensed drug dealers, of medical experts(on unnatural deaths).
administrative statement-compulsion, the right to silence, required record exception