earticle

영어

In connection with the investigation into comments made by the National Intelligence Service during the 18th Presidential Elections, the former Commissioner of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency is currently facing an on-going trial where he was indicted on the charges of interfering with the investigations of front-line police force and causing them to announce false investigation findings. In relation to this case, this study examines in detail the grounds for the police's authority to command investigations, the method of exercising such authority and its limitations and inquired into matters that required to be supplemented for the purpose of ensuring fair and just investigations. The police's authority to command investigations derives from the State Public Officials Act and the Police Act. Individual laws and administrative rules also grant the authority to investigate or to command investigations. However, details regarding the exercise of such authorities are mostly delegated to the head of the investigative department or the working-level staff. The authority to command investigations is exercised in different ways such as by written command, oral command, investigative report and command through briefings with advisors and based on investigative instructions from higher-level police headquarters. Limitations on the authority to command investigations include the prohibition on the wrongful use of official authority under the Police Act and the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers, and regarding the illegal and unjust exercise of command authority that violates the investigative authority of the working- level police includes the wrongful exercise of authority, and punishment for the dereliction of duties under the Criminal Act, the prohibition on the wrongful exercise of command authority based on the internal system of the police force and the limitations based on the conflicts with the prosecutors' authority to command investigations. In conclusion of this study, it is determined that, in order to make transparent the exercise of the police's authority to command investigations and to ensure the fair and just exercise of such authority, the exercise of the commander's authority to command investigations should be specifically limited. Detailed procedures should be legislated in regulations on crime investigations to actualize the right to raise objections during investigations as stipulated under the Police Act. Investigative instructions and command over investigations should be rigidly separated and exercised in such manner to prevent the violation of the police's autonomous authority to investigate. It is also necessary to operate an independent investigate system in the form of a special investigation team by referring to the Prosecutors' Office's specially-appointed prosecutors system with respect to political cases. Lastly, uneven change in personnel for particular areas in the investigative command system for election offenses should be refrained from, and a stringent evaluation procedure should be implemented to hold those responsible for the results of an investigation command.

한국어

18대 대선과정의 국정원 댓글사건 수사와 관련하여 전 서울경찰청장이 일선 경찰서의 수 사를 방해하고 허위수사결과를 발표토록 한 혐의로 기소되어 재판을 받고 있는데, 이와 관 련하여 경찰 수사지휘권의 근거와 그 행사 방법 및 한계에 대해 구체적으로 살펴보고, 수 사의 공정성 확보 측면에서 보완할 사항을 연구하였다. 경찰 수사지휘권은 국가공무원법과 경찰법에 근거하고 있으며, 개별법규와 행정규칙 등에 서도 수사권 또는 수사지휘권을 부여하고 있으나 구체적 행사는 내부규정에 의해 대부분 수사부서의 장 또는 실무자에 위임되어 있다. 수사지휘 방법은 서면지휘와 구두지휘, 참모 보고를 통한 수사보고 및 지휘, 상급경찰관서의 수사지도 등의 방법으로 행사되고 있으며, 수사지휘권 행사의 한계로는 경찰법과 경찰관직무집행법상의 권한남용금지와 실무자의 수사권을 침해하는 위법하고 부당한 지휘권 행사에는 형법상 직권남용과 직무유기로의 처 벌, 경찰 내 제도에 의한 지휘권 남용금지, 검사의 수사지휘와 충돌시 한계 등이 있다. 경찰 수사지휘권 행사를 투명하고 공정하게 행사하기 위해서는 지휘관의 구체적 수사지휘 권 행사를 제한할 필요가 있으며, 경찰법에 규정된 수사상 이의제기권을 구체화 할 수 있 도록 범죄수사규칙에 상세한 절차를 만들어야 하며, 수사지도와 수사지휘를 엄격히 구분․ 행사하여 일선 경찰서의 수사자율권을 침해하지 않아야 하고, 정치적 사건에 검찰의 특임 검사제를 참조하여 특별수사팀 형태의 독립된 수사시스템을 운영할 필요가 있으며, 선거 사범 수사지휘체계의 특정지역 편중인사를 지양하고, 수사지휘결과에 대해 책임도 지는 엄격한 평가절차를 마련하여야 한다고 본다.