The right to remain silent is a basic right of the defendant or 녀spect guaranteed by the constitution and criminal procedure law. It is important to notify the right to the defendant or suspect so that he can excercise the right properly and effectively. The timing of notification and the content of the right to remain silent are closely related. The investigator should notify the suspect or defendant of this right before conducting any questioning that could incriminate the suspect or defendant.
Considering the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act which punishes the defendants and suspects who do not cooperate in identification process, they may not exert their right to remain silent during that procedure as legally guaranteed rights.
Identification itself isn't a disadvantageous thing to the suspect or defendant. There are many countries which impose a penalty on the suspect or defendant who doesn't state his or her identification.
In addition to that, even if there is a breach of notification, the statement should be admissible by the standing theory or for impeachment purpose. According to newly revised Korean Criminal Procedure code, notification is not required until the identification process has finished during the investigation process. And if the suspect or defendant initiates a voluntary statement, the statement should be admissible without the "Miranda" warning.

[대상판결] 대법원 1992. 6. 23. 선고 92도 682
  Ⅰ. 사안
  Ⅱ. 1․2심 판결
  Ⅲ. [대상 대법원 판결의 요지]
 [연구]
  Ⅰ. 서
  Ⅱ. 진술거부권의 고지
  Ⅲ. 진술거부권의 내용
  Ⅳ. 진술거부권 불고지의 효과
  Ⅴ. 개정 형사소송법상의 진술거부권 검토
  Ⅵ. 결론
 영문 요약

• 안성수(창원지방검찰청)