Disposition and control of investigations at the police level under the Criminal Procedure Act

Reforms on the adjustment of investigative power include drastically reducing the direct investigation power by limiting the types of crimes that the prosecution can directly investigate in order to prevent the prosecution's abuse of investigative power, abolishing the prosecution's command of the police in principle, and giving the police the primary right to terminate the investigation. In the meantime, while the control measures for the police's decision to send are the right to request a supplementary investigation, exclusion of duties, and disciplinary action, the prosecution has the right to request a reinvestigation along with an objection by the complainant. In addition, the decision to suspend the investigation has the right to appeal to the head of the higher police office, such as sending the case record to the prosecution for suspension of the investigation, requesting corrective action, and the complainant. The problem is that there is no separate period for filing an objection by the complainant for the decision to reject, but in light of the purpose of giving the police the right to decide not to reject, legislatively, it is desirable to stipulate that the complainant can file an objection within 30 days when the police give the notice of non-prosecution, just as the prosecutor can appeal within 30 days. In the current practice, there are complaints that as the police's handling of cases increases, they do not conduct sufficient investigations well, but rather only tell the complainant to bring evidence. In particular, while the work of the police is exploding, the police's investigative manpower is insufficient, and the investigation has become a department to avoid. In the meantime, the Ministry of Justice cites it as the reason for the revision of the investigation rules to overcome the delay and insolvency of the investigation, but critics say that it is a situation in which it is using an expedient to change the enforcement decree to regain the authority lost by the law. In general, when the system is changed, human and material resources must be provided to support its operation, so the solution should naturally enhance the investigation capacity along with the supplementation of the police's investigation manpower.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University
Published
2025-08-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.38133/cnulawreview.2025.45.3.97
Primary Topic
Criminal Law and Evidence
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Disposition and control of investigations at the police level under the Criminal Procedure Act

Yi-Chul Shin
1 links
Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University
Criminal Law and Evidence
article

Disposition and control of investigations at the police level under the Criminal Procedure Act

Yi-Chul Shin
article en

Abstract

Reforms on the adjustment of investigative power include drastically reducing the direct investigation power by limiting the types of crimes that the prosecution can directly investigate in order to prevent the prosecution's abuse of investigative power, abolishing the prosecution's command of the police in principle, and giving the police the primary right to terminate the investigation. In the meantime, while the control measures for the police's decision to send are the right to request a supplementary investigation, exclusion of duties, and disciplinary action, the prosecution has the right to request a reinvestigation along with an objection by the complainant. In addition, the decision to suspend the investigation has the right to appeal to the head of the higher police office, such as sending the case record to the prosecution for suspension of the investigation, requesting corrective action, and the complainant. The problem is that there is no separate period for filing an objection by the complainant for the decision to reject, but in light of the purpose of giving the police the right to decide not to reject, legislatively, it is desirable to stipulate that the complainant can file an objection within 30 days when the police give the notice of non-prosecution, just as the prosecutor can appeal within 30 days. In the current practice, there are complaints that as the police's handling of cases increases, they do not conduct sufficient investigations well, but rather only tell the complainant to bring evidence. In particular, while the work of the police is exploding, the police's investigative manpower is insufficient, and the investigation has become a department to avoid. In the meantime, the Ministry of Justice cites it as the reason for the revision of the investigation rules to overcome the delay and insolvency of the investigation, but critics say that it is a situation in which it is using an expedient to change the enforcement decree to regain the authority lost by the law. In general, when the system is changed, human and material resources must be provided to support its operation, so the solution should naturally enhance the investigation capacity along with the supplementation of the police's investigation manpower.

Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National UniversityVol. 45(3)
Openalex Percentile: Top 63%
Criminal Law and Evidence
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Disposition and control of investigations at the police level under the Criminal Procedure Act — Yi-Chul Shin · Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS