Introducing hearsay rule in 1961, the words of provisions that provide the authentication and attendance of the declarant as exceptions of principle of the court's self-experience, were used as exceptions of the hearsay rule. It results in confusion of the elements of the hearsay rule with the elements of the authentication in the jurisprudence. Many literatures insist and place emphasis on the elements of the authentication as the elements of exceptions of the hearsay rule. With this confusion and misunderstanding, it became very difficult to understand the hearsay rule and many improper interpretations result from this confusion. In the future, the discussion which distinguish the elements of the hearsay rule from the elements of the authentication should be made actively and lead the academy and practice.

[대상판례] 대법원 2008. 12. 24. 선고 2008도9414 판결, 대법원 2008. 7. 10. 선고 2007도10755 판결
  [2008도9414 판결]
  [2007도10755 판결]
 [연 구]
  Ⅰ. 서
  Ⅱ. 진술증거의 전문증거성과 증거의 진정성
  Ⅲ. 전문증거와 증명, 진정성 문제의 관계
  Ⅳ. 진술녹음의 경우
  Ⅴ. 판례에 대한 평가
  Ⅵ. 결 어
 [참고문헌]
 [Abstract]

• 이완규(서울남부지방검찰청 형사4부장, 법학박사) | Wankyu Lee