세관직원의 국제우편물 개봉,시료채취와 수사기관의 통제배달 -대법원 2013.09.26. 선고 2013도7718 판결의 평석을 중심으로- = The Case-Review of the 2013do7718 decision of Korean Supreme Court from the perspective of the theory of controlled delivery of international package

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The ‘2013do7718’decision of Korean Supreme Court (2013do2511) was declared by ‘Korean Supreme Court`` (hereafter ‘KSC``) in September, 2013. The decision is very important, because it became the first decision of KSC which treated the issues of the so-called controlled delivery of international package. The methodology of this review is the comparative analysis of this decision with comparable ones of U. S. Supreme Court decisions, especially ‘Illinois v. Andreas (1983)’ and ‘United States v. Ramsey (1977)’ The technique of controlled delivery is used when a consignment of illicit drugs is detected and allowed to go forward under the control and surveillance of law enforcement officers in order to secure evidence against the organizers of such illicit drug traffic. This technique has been proved effective in some countries in identifying and bringing to justice principals, organizers and financiers of the illicit drug traffic. The controlled delivery technique is compatible with the requirements of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, but its application depends on the particular legal and administrative provisions in the countries concerned. The technique merits wider use, and it does not involve any element of entrapment. It has been used most effectively when illicit drugs are discovered in unaccompanied freight consignments or in the post. Controlled deliveries involving a courier present special difficulties and should be treated with caution. In a controlled delivery, security of information is of paramount importance as is the appropriate knowledge and co-operation of the law enforcement authorities. Such co-operation is essential between the country in which the initial detection of drugs has occurred, transit countries and the country of final destination. A number of important detections have been made as a result of speedy international co-operation of this type between law enforcement authorities. Controlled delivery is not governed by law in South Korea. In practice, it is subject to the tactical discretion of the criminal prosecution authorities. The ‘2013do7718’decision of Korean Supreme Court would be the general guidelines to regulate the prosecution’s future Controlled delivery practices.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 최윤수, "조직범죄의 국제연계 차단방안에 관한 연구" 1996
• 2 이경열, "국제조직범죄에 대한 통제배달기법의 활용 - 특히 국제마약사범을 중심으로" 한국형사정책연구원 15 (15): 245-276, 2004
• 3 Tobias W. Mock, "THE TSA'S NEW X-RAY VISION: THE FOURTH AMENDMENT IMPLICATIONS OF ‘BODY-SCAN’ SEARCHES AT DOMESTIC AIRPORT SECURITY CHECKPOINTS" 2009
• 4 Geoffrey G. Hemphill, "THE ADMINISTRATIVE SEARCH DOCTRINE: ISN'T THIS EXACTLY WHAT THE FRAMERS WERE TRYING TO AVOID?" (Spring) : 1995
• 5 Yule Kim, "Summary of “Protecting the U.S. Perimeter: Border Searches Under the Fourth Amendment”" 2009
• 6 Eve Brensike Primus, "DISENTANGLING ADMINISTRATIVE SEARCHES" 2011
• 7 Sanford L. Dow, "AIRPORT SECURITY, TERRORISM, AND THE FOURTH AMENDMENT: A LOOK BACK AND A STEP FORWARD" 1993