이미지 검색을 사용해 보세요
검색창 이전화면 이전화면
최근 검색어
인기 검색어

소득공제
2020 형사소송법 3년간 판례정리
2017년 7월~2020년 6월 판례공보 및 미간행 판례
신호진
문형사 2020.07.13.
가격
12,000
12,000
YES포인트?
360원 (3%)
5만원 이상 구매 시 2천원 추가 적립
결제혜택
카드/간편결제 혜택을 확인하세요
  • 본 도서의 개정판이 출간되었습니다.

이미 소장하고 있다면 판매해 보세요.

  •  국내배송만 가능
  •  문화비소득공제 가능

목차

…… 형 사 소 송 법 ……
[1] 수사의 방법 ···································································································· 3
-피의자신문시 보호장비 사용 여부 및 변호인의 피의자신문 참여권 침해 여부(大決 2015모2357) ··········· 3
[2] 대물적 강제수사 ······························································································ 5
-전자정보에 대한 압수·수색의 방법과 절차(大判 2017도13263) ·································· 5
-수출입물품에 대한 조사·압수와 영장주의(大判 2014도8719) ····································· 7
-압수·수색과 사건과의 관련성(大判 2017도13458) ···················································· 8
-압수·수색과 사건과의 관련성(大判 2019도14341) ·················································· 10
-압수·수색영장의 장소적 범위(大判 2017도9747) ···················································· 12
-압수·수색영장의 제시방법(大決 2019모3526) ························································· 14
-압수·수색영장 집행절차의 적법요건(大判 2015도12400) ········································· 15
-압수물의 가환부(大決 2017모236) ········································································ 18
-강제채뇨의 요건과 절차 및 방법(大判 2018도6219) ··············································· 20
-체포 목적의 피의자 수색의 허용요건(憲決 2015헌바370,2016헌가7(병합)) ···················· 22
-범죄장소에서의 압수·수색·검증과 하자의 치유(大判 2014도16080) ·························· 23
-긴급체포 후의 압수·수색·검증의 요건과 절차(大判 2017도10309) ···························· 24
-비밀녹음한 전화통화내용의 증거능력(大判 2015도1900) ········································· 25
[3] 수사의 종결 ·································································································· 27
-증인에 대한 검찰 진술조서의 증거능력(大判 2013도6825) ················································ 27
[4] 공소와 공소권이론 ························································································· 29
-공소권남용의 요건과 효과(大判 2018도14295) ······················································ 29
[5] 공소제기의 기본원칙 ······················································································ 30
-하자 있는 공소제기결정에 대한 불복방법(大判 2017도13465) ································· 30
-재정신청 기각결정 확정 후의 소추의 요건(大判 2014도17182) ································ 31
[6] 공소제기의 방식 ···························································································· 33
-공소사실이 부분적으로 특정되지 않은 경우(大判 2019도10086) ······························ 33
-공소사실이 부분적으로 특정되지 않은 경우(大判 2017도3448) ································ 35
[7] 공소시효 ······································································································· 37
-「공직선거법」 위반죄의 공소시효 기산일(大判 2019도8815) ····································· 37
-미수범의 공소시효의 기산점(大判 2016도14820) ··················································· 38
[8] 변호인 ·········································································································· 39
-‘피고인이 심신장애의 의심이 있는 때’ 국선변호인의 선정 여부(大判 2019도8531) ····· 39
-반의사불벌죄에서 변호인의 처벌불원의사표시의 대리(大判 2019도10678) ················· 41
[9] 공판심리의 범위 ···························································································· 43
-공소사실의 동일성의 판단기준(大判 2018도20928) ················································ 43
-공소사실의 비양립관계 여부(大判 2018도3688) ····················································· 45
-공소장변경의 필요성(大判 2018도5909) ································································ 46
-공소장변경의 필요성(大判 2019도4608) ································································ 48
-공소장변경과 피고인의 동의(大判 2017도5122) ····················································· 50
[10] 공판정에서의 심리 ······················································································· 51
-전문심리위원 참여절차의 적법성(大判 2018도19051) ············································· 51
-피고인과 변호인의 최종의견진술(大判 2018도327) ················································· 52
[11] 증거조사와 강제처분 ···················································································· 53
-피고인 소환의 방법(大判 2018도13377) ······························································· 53
[12] 증명의 기본원칙 ·························································································· 55
-간접증거에 의한 사실인정의 요건(大判 2017도1549) ·············································· 55
-피해자의 진술의 증명력(大判 2018도7709) ··························································· 57
-과학적 증거방법의 증명력 인정요건(大判 2017도14222) ········································· 60
[13] 위법수집증거배제법칙 ··················································································· 62
-위법수집증거와 증거배제의 기준(大判 2018도20504) ············································· 62
-위법수집증거배제법칙과 독수의 과실이론(大判 2018도4075) ··································· 65
[14] 전문법칙 ····································································································· 67
-본래증거와 전문증거의 구별기준(大判 2018도13792, 전원합의체 판결) ···················· 67
-본래증거와 전문증거의 구별기준(大判 2017도19499) ············································· 69
-‘공범에 대한 사법경찰관 작성 피의자신문조서’ 및 ‘전문진술’의 증거능력(大判 2019도11552) ········· 71
-진술조서, 전문진술, 전문진술을 기재한 조서의 증거능력(大判 2015도12981,2015전도218) ···· 73
-압수조서에 기재된 ‘압수경위’의 증거능력 인정요건(大判 2019도13290) ··················· 75
-정당하지 않은 증언거부와 제314조의 적용여부(大判 2018도13945, 전원합의체 판결) ····· 77
-기타 특히 신용할 만한 정황에 의하여 작성된 문서(大判 2017도12671) ···················· 79
[15] 자백보강법칙 ······························································································· 80
-자백에 대한 보강증거의 자격과 범위(大判 2017도20247) ······································· 80
-자백에 대한 보강증거의 범위(大判 2017도17628) ······················································· 82
[16] 재판의 확정과 효력 ······················································································ 83
-보호처분 불처분결정과 일사부재리의 원칙(大判 2016도5423) ·································· 83
-재심판결의 기판력의 범위(大判 2016도756) ·························································· 85
-과형상 일죄와 기판력의 범위(大判 2017도11687) ·················································· 86
-기판력과 공소사실의 동일성(大判 2015도11679) ··················································· 87
-기판력과 공소사실의 동일성(大判 2013도7649) ····················································· 88
[17] 소송비용 ····································································································· 89
-무죄판결에 대한 비용보상(大決 2018도906) ···································································· 89
[18] 상소의 일반이론 ·························································································· 90
-약식명령에 대한 정식재판청구권 회복의 사유(大決 2017모1557) ····························· 90
-상소권회복청구의 시기(大判 2018도15109) ··························································· 91
-보안처분과 불이익변경금지의 원칙(大判 2016도15961) ·········································· 93
-보안처분과 불이익변경금지의 원칙(大判 2018도13367) ·········································· 94
-보안처분과 불이익변경금지의 원칙(大判 2019도11540) ·········································· 95
[19] 항 소 ········································································································· 97
-소송기록접수통지 후 선임된 사선변호인에 대한 소송기록접수통지 여부(大決 2015도10651, 전원합의체 결정) ·························································································································· 97
-항소이유서제출기간 도과 후 선임된 사선변호인에 대한 소송기록접수통지(大判 2019도4221) ··· 99
-소송기록접수통지의 상대방(大決 2018모642) ······················································· 101
-재감자에 대한 소송기록접수통지의 방법(大決 2017모1680) ··································· 102
-재감자에 대한 소송기록접수통지의 방법(大決 2017모2162) ··································· 103
-항소이유서 제출기간 경과 전의 심판(大判 2017도13748) ······································ 104
-항소법원의 심판범위(大判 2016도18553) ···························································· 105
-항소심에서의 불출석재판의 허용요건(大判 2019도5426) ······································· 106
-항소심에서 공시송달의 허용요건(大判 2018도14531) ············································ 107
-제1심 증언의 신빙성 유무에 대한 항소심의 판단(大判 2018도17748) ····················· 108
[20] 상 고 ········································································································ 110
-소송절차의 법령위반과 상고이유(大判 2018도19034) ··········································· 110
-양형자료의 변동과 상고이유(大判 2017도14769) ·················································· 111
-상고이유 제한의 법리(大判 2017도16593-1, 전원합의체 판결) ······························ 112
[21] 항 고 ········································································································ 117
-항고 및 재항고의 절차(大決 2017모1377) ······································································· 117
-항고법원의 소송기록접수 등의 통지(大決 2018모1698) ······················································· 118
[22] 재 심 ········································································································ 119
-재심대상판결의 판결서가 발견되지 않은 경우(大決 2015모2229, 전원합의체 결정) ········· 119
-재심의 대상 및 사유(大決 2015모3243) ······························································ 122
-합헌결정 이전의 간통에 대한 재심(大判 2019도15167) ········································· 124
-재심사유가 되는 위헌결정의 소급효가 미치는 범위(大決 2015모2204) ···················· 125
-재심판결과 불이익변경금지의 원칙 등(大判 2018도13382) ···································· 127
-재심판결과 불이익변경금지의 원칙(大判 2015도15782) ········································· 128
[23] 비상상고 ··································································································· 130
-사실오인과 비상상고(大判 2017오1) ··································································· 130
[24] 약식절차 ··································································································· 131
-정식재판에 다른 사건이 병합심리된 경우 ‘형종상향금지원칙’의 적용여부(大判 2019도15700) ·· 131
-정식재판에 다른 사건이 병합심리된 경우 ‘형종상향금지원칙’의 적용여부(大判 2020도355) ···· 132
[25] 즉결심판절차 ····························································································· 133
-범칙금 납부기간의 의미(大判 2017도13409) ························································ 133
-인장이나 지장이 없는 정식재판청구서의 적법성 여부(大決 2017모3458) ················· 134
[26] 소년에 대한 특별절차 ················································································· 135
-소년법 제53조 본문의 적용범위(大判 2018도3768) ·············································· 135
[27] 피해자 보호절차 ························································································ 136
-배상명령의 적법성(大判 2018도17726) ······························································· 136
[28] 형사보상과 명예회복 ·················································································· 137
-미결구금일수가 본형에 산입된 경우와 형사보상(大決 2017모1990) ························ 137

참고판례 ··········································································································· 138
판례색인 ··········································································································· 139

저자 소개 1

연세대학교 법학과와 고려대학교 대학원을 졸업했다. 연세대, 동국대, 단국대, 건국대, 경북대, 동아대, 전북대, 영남대학교 등에서 형법특강을 담당하였으며, 한국 싸이버대학교(KCU)에서 법학과 교수, 동국대학교 법학과에서 법학과 겸임교수를 역임하였다.

신호진의 다른 상품

품목정보

발행일
2020년 07월 13일
쪽수, 무게, 크기
138쪽 | 크기확인중
ISBN13
9791189917753

출판사 리뷰

“형사소송법 3년간 판례정리”에 대하여

본 “형사소송법 3년간 판례정리”는 ‘2017년 하반기부터 2020년 상반기까지’의 법원공보에 수록된 판례와 미간행 판례를 정리한 자료이다. 본서의 특징을 설명하면 다음과 같다.

1. 정확한 ‘사실관계’의 정리ㆍ소개
판례는 과거에 발생한 범죄에 대한 대법원의 최종적인 판단이다. 그러므로 그 범죄의 사실관계를 모르고서 판례를 공부한다는 것은 ‘어떤 영화를 보지도 않고 또한 그 줄거리도 모르면서 그 영화에 대해서 논하는 것’과 같이 실로 무의미한 일이다. 그래서 본서에서는 대법원 판례에 나타난 사실관계를 정리하여 소개함으로써 법조문과 법리 적용의 전제가 되는 사안을 정확하게 파악할 수 있도록 하였다.

2. ‘주요쟁점’의 명확한 부각
본서에 수록된 판례들은 전부 최종심인 대법원의 판례이다. 사건이 제1심이나 항소심에서 종결되지 않고 대법원에까지 올라왔다는 것은 그 사건에 무엇인가 문제가 있었기 때문이다. 그러므로 대법원 판례를 정확하게 이해하기 위해서는 그 사건에서 검사와 피고인 및 변호인간에 다투어진 “쟁점”이 무엇인지를 알아야 한다. 그래서 본서에서는 그러한 쟁점들을 ‘질문’의 형식으로 부각시킴으로써 그 질문에 대한 대법원의 ‘답변’인 판례의 내용을 보다 정확하게 이해할 수 있도록 하였다.

3. 필요한 ‘판결이유’의 발췌 소개
대법원은 ‘판결문’의 내용을 ‘판결요지’의 형식으로 정리하여 제공하고 있는데, 때로는 그 판결요지의 내용만으로는 판례의 내용을 정확하게 파악하는 것이 어려운 경우가 있다. 이에 본서에서는 필요한 경우에는 ‘판결이유’ 중에서 중요한 부분을 발췌하여 소개함으로써 판례의 정확한 이해에 도움이 되도록 하였다.

4. 꼭 읽고 기억해야 할 ‘중요부분’ 강조
최근의 대법원 판례들은 그 판결문의 분량이 상당히 많다. 판결문 본문의 경우에는 적게는 수 페이지에서 많게는 백여 페이지를 넘는 경우도 있고, 심지어는 판결요지만 수 페이지가 되는 경우도 많다. 이에 본서에서는 객관식 또는 선택형 문제의 지문으로 출제될 가능성이 있는 부분에 대해서는 ‘고딕 내지 underline 등’으로 강조를 함으로써 최종정리시에 효과적으로 활용할 수 있도록 하였다.

아무쪼록 본서의 적절한 활용으로 합격의 영광을 안기를 간절히 기원하면서…
2020.7.3.
법학박사 신 호 진

리뷰/한줄평1

리뷰

첫번째 리뷰어가 되어주세요.

한줄평

10.0 한줄평 총점

클린봇이 부적절한 글을 감지 중입니다.

설정