韩国影子陪审团评议过程实证研究

Empirical Analysis on Shadow Jury Deliberations in Korea

通过对2010年至2011年发生在韩国的18起真实案件的影子陪审团评议过程的观察和评议录像的内容分析,研究了陪审团裁决的约束力、陪审员数量、定罪和量刑方面的陪审团评议以及法官对陪审团评议的介入。总体来说,影子陪审团轮流发言积极参与评议程序,并且陪审员在辩论过程中彼此尊重,出现误解法律、混淆定罪和量刑事实的情况比预想的少。陪审团规模与评议质量之间没有决定性的关系。尽管令人鼓舞的和有待改进的方面并存,但是韩国陪审团评议的整体质量还是不错的。随着时间流逝,韩国的陪审制度有望逐步发展为一种能够加强普通民众的民主参与并提高司法公信力的稳定的制度。

By direct observation and content analysis of the videotape about shadow jury deliberations in 18 actual cases between November 2010 and July 2011 in Korea,we examined four key areas in jury deliberation:( 1) the binding effect of the jury verdict,( 2) the number of jurors,( 3) the jurors' deliberations regarding both conviction and sentencing,and( 4) the judge's intervention in jury deliberation. The results demonstrate that the shadow jurors in general actively participated in the deliberation process by speaking in turn,and were respectful toward other jurors in debate. Misunderstanding of law and the intermingling of facts relevant to conviction or sentencing were not as frequent as many people expected. Also there was no definitive relationship between the size of the jury and the quality of deliberation. Although encouraging aspects as well as areas for improvement coexist,the overall quality of jury deliberation in Korea,as evidenced by this study,is positive. Over time,the Korean jury system is expected to be firmly established as a robust institution to increase democratic participation of the lay people and to enhance the credibility of the judiciary.