소송법상 전자문서에 관한 연구

서지정보

ㆍ발행기관 : 가천대학교 법학연구소 ㆍ수록지정보 : 가천법학 / 5권 / 1호
ㆍ저자명 : 가정준

목차

Ⅰ. 서 론
Ⅱ. 증거신청당사자가 제출한 증거의 채택원칙
Ⅲ. 전자문서의 증거력
Ⅳ. 전자문서의 국제적 사용을 증진시키기 위한 동향
V. 결 론

한국어 초록

전자거래가 활성화되기 위해서는 전자문서의 활용과 그 법적 효과가 분명하여야 할 것이다. 이와 관련한 법적 효과에 대해 “전자거래기본법”과 그 개정안은 일반문서와 법적으로 동등하게 취급해야 할 것을 규정함으로써 이에 대비하고 있다. 하지만 구체적인 문제는 결국 민사소송상 전자문서를 증거로써 어떻게 취급하느냐에 귀결된다고 할 수 있다. 따라서 일반문서가 민사소송에서 어떠한 방법과 절차를 통해 증거로 채택되는지를 확인하고 이것이 전자문서에 어떻게 적용되는 지를 고찰하는 것은 의미 있는 작업이라고 생각된다. 우리나라 민사소송법이 “자유심증주의”에 의존하여 법관의 직관과 판단에 따라 증거의 채택여부가 결정되는 구조를 갖고 있다. 이에 비해 미국은 소송법을 통해 법관의 직관과 판단을 최소화하고 구체적으로 법정 요건에 따라 증거로 채택하는 “법정증거주의”에 따른다. 미국 증거법상 일반문서와 전자문서가 증거로써 어떻게 채택되는 지를 우리의 것과 비교 분석함으로써 “자유심증주의”에 의존하고 있는 우리나라 민사소송법에 좀 더 논의되어야 할 부분이 무엇인지를 살펴보고자 한다. 또한 소송법과 증거법의 체계가 전혀 다른 두 국가의 법을 비교함으로써 UNCITRAL의 “전자계약협약”이 어떻게 규율되고 어떠한 논의가 필요하였는지를 간접적으로 알릴 수 있다는 점이 본 논문의 연구 성과라고 볼 수 있다.

영어 초록

This article tries to show how important the electronic evidence is in court and reality and how it is admitted as a legal fact by comparing the documentary evidence and its rules. In fact, legal scholars have not seriously developed the theory how the court should admit electronic evidence before facing practical demands for its necessity in court and business. In the United States based on strictly adversarial system, whether evidence is allowed or not as a legal fact is dependent on rules with regard to evidence. The court plays a confined role in overseeing the process by which evidence is given and weighing up that evidence. Like documentary evidence, electronic evidence may be admitted in court when legal requirements are satisfied. They are relevancy, authenticity, and originality. First, the relevancy is whether the evidence has a tendency or not to make some fact that is of consequence to the litigation more or less probable than it otherwise would be. The probative value of evidence is regard to the issue of relevancy while the danger of evidence about the issue of risk for unfair prejudice. Evidence may be admitted if the probative value is high enough or the danger is low enough. Second, as an issue of authenticity, evidence must be what the proponent says it is. It is one of conditional relevance: proffered evidence is only relevant if it is what the proponent says it is. The degree of foundation required to authenticate electronic evidence depends on the quality and completeness of the data input, the complexity of the computer processing and so on. Third, the original document or data is required in the name of Best Evidence Rule. However, the requirement for the original form can be met in relation to an electronic communication if others elements substituting the originality are satisfied instead because of the characteristics of electronic evidence. On the other hand, in Korea, like other civil law countries, based on inquisitorial system, whether evidence is allowed or not as a legal fact is dependent on the discretion of judge. In other words, the conduct of the trial is heavily in the hand of the court. Few rules of evidence are available to the court. Like documentary evidence, electronic evidence may be admitted in court when a judge believes that electronic data and information are reliable in proving what a claimant argues. However, even in the inquisitor system, formal requirements such as relevancy, authenticity and originality may be met for documentary and electronic evidence to be admitted in court. The authenticity and originality in Korea and those in the United States look similar to each other because they play a role to prove that documentary and electronic evidence are reliable and true. As the substantial requirement, the issue of relevancy in Korea is totally dependent on the hand of the court without particular rules. This is why Korean civil procedure is necessary to develop the rules of evidence in determining whether electronic evidence is admissible. United Nations Commission on International Trade Law has made Model Laws on Electronic Commerce and Electronic Signatures. In addition, it recently agreed United Nations Convention on the Use of Electronic Communication in International Contracts (thereafter UN Convention on Electronic International Contracts). Their purpose is to aim that electronic data and information should be equally treated with document to improve international trade. In particular, UN Convention on Electronic International Contracts regulates as substantial law rather than procedural law that electronic data and information can be admitted as evidence if they are satisfied with the requirements by UN Convention on Electronic International Contracts.

참고 자료

없음