공소장변경의 필요성판단 (Determining the need for modification of an indictment)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 원광대학교 법학연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 원광법학 / 30권 / 2호 / 177 ~ 196페이지
· 저자명 : 이존걸

초록

This paper is about the judgment of determining the need formodification of an indictment theories and the criteria for the judgment ofdetermining the need for modification for studied.
Truth discovery and substantive modification of an indictment theauthority to impose penalties the country, and at the same time to enableproper exercise of the accused can guarantee defense of the rightsinstitution.
Thus, the court can modification of modification of reason modificationof an indictment occurs, the public prosecutor require. The public prosecutormust apply for modification of an indictment.
An indictment should be changed in any case for the opposition to havea different theory. Most importantly, the public prosecutor receive anindictment want to judge described the defendant appeals the fact itself.
In this sense, the theory is reasonable to mention the fact. SupremeCourt follows this theory. In fact, according to the change of these claims,and the fact that the defendant's defense of the changes result in asubstantial penalty if the concern is that should the need modification of an indictment.

영어초록

This paper is about the judgment of determining the need formodification of an indictment theories and the criteria for the judgment ofdetermining the need for modification for studied.
Truth discovery and substantive modification of an indictment theauthority to impose penalties the country, and at the same time to enableproper exercise of the accused can guarantee defense of the rightsinstitution.
Thus, the court can modification of modification of reason modificationof an indictment occurs, the public prosecutor require. The public prosecutormust apply for modification of an indictment.
An indictment should be changed in any case for the opposition to havea different theory. Most importantly, the public prosecutor receive anindictment want to judge described the defendant appeals the fact itself.
In this sense, the theory is reasonable to mention the fact. SupremeCourt follows this theory. In fact, according to the change of these claims,and the fact that the defendant's defense of the changes result in asubstantial penalty if the concern is that should the need modification of an indictment.

참고자료

· 없음