The recovery of right to appeal after the appeal duration elapses, is the system which recovers the right to appeal which disappears with decision of the court of justice. The recovery of right to appeal is provided in the criminal procedure law(§345~§358). Against the right to appeal lapse the right to appeal own responsibility not recognizing the right to appeal even in nil the right to appeal it is unjust and it reaches the wave high price which it restricts.
If it decides a justice, it the right to appeal it is unjust and becomes the result which it restricts. Appeal recovery volume the legal stability compared to is the system which makes an entity justice first of all. And this system justice decision form profit of the accused it is unjust and the fact that it deprives a system for it is. The criminal procedure law providing, the reexamination which it is doing, at decision judging and emergency with system and sameness, the recovery of right to appeal system is recognized with the process which excludes double jeopardy effect.
Recently the research and the discussion regarding criminal procedure law opening a court are actively advanced from viewpoint of administration of justice reform. And also the simplification, nimbleness plan of criminal case administration of justice process are discussed. Against the recovery of right to appeal system specially only it will be stopping in the degree which introduces only a relation regulation to be, the research against hereupon almost there is to a condition which is not.
The dissertation which in short, it sees with afterwords observes a same contents and the reporter it does. First it investigates the relation and a legislation maintenance plan of the recovery of right to appeal and reexamination from the dissertation which it sees. Second, Representative the recovery of right to appeal it will be able to requisition in order, provided special law at constitution should have infringed the justice claim which is guaranteed with, it tries to observe the legislation opening a court plan against hereupon. Third, The regulation regarding the recovery of right to appeal requisition and a suspension of executant at constitution is quick it is guaranteed and infringe the right which will administer justice with, it investigates a legislation opening a court plan, it does. And it relates with the recovery of right to appeal system and against the propriety of necessary justice suspension of executant regulation it observes and the reporter it does.

[대상결정 1] 대법원 2006. 2. 8. 자 2005모507 결정
  [사건개요]
  [대법원 결정]
 [대상판결 2] 서울중앙지방법원 2004. 3. 18. 선고 2003노10465 판결
  [사건개요]
  [원심법원 판결요지]
 [연 구]
  Ⅰ. 문제제기
  Ⅱ. 상소권회복제도와 특례법상의 재심제도의 관련성 및 입법정비방안
 Ⅲ. 특례법 제23조 불출석재판의 위헌 여부와 입법개정방안
  1. 헌법재판소의 판단
  2. 불출석재판에 대한 비교입법례
  3. 입법개정방안
 Ⅳ. 형사소송법 제347조와 제348조의 위헌 여부와 입법개정방안
 Ⅴ. 제348조 제1항 필요적 재판집행정지 규정의 타당성
 [Abstract]

• 천진호(경북대학교 법과대학 법학부) | Chun Jin Ho (Department of Law, Kyungpook National University)