부패재산의 몰수 및 회복에 관한 특례법 타법개정이 바꾸는 반환 집행 주체: 제11조·제13조·제20조·제21조의 검사장을 지방공소청장으로

무엇이 바뀌었나

This change is an amendment consequent upon the enactment of the Prosecution Service Act. The reasons for enactment and amendment stated in the original text on the Korea Law Information Center are the reasons for the enactment not of this Act but of the Prosecution Service Act, and state that, pursuant to the amendment to the Government Organization Act abolishing the Prosecutors' Office and newly establishing the Prosecution Service and the Serious Crime Investigation Agency for mutual checks between investigative agencies and prosecuting agencies, it seeks to prescribe the organization of the Prosecution Service and the duties of prosecutors, among others (notation corrected in transcription). There is no reason in the original text for changing the system for confiscation and recovery of corrupt property itself.

Pursuant to the amendment text (Supplementary Provisions of the Prosecution Service Act, Article 9 (25)), in Article 11 (2), the counterpart on whom the Minister of Justice orders mutual legal assistance measures and custody upon deciding to return execution property, etc. was changed from "the Chief Prosecutor of a district prosecutors' office (hereinafter referred to as the 'Chief Prosecutor')" to "the head of a district prosecution service," and the counterpart of the international mutual legal assistance measures and temporary custody order prior to the return decision in paragraph (3) of the same Article also became the head of a district prosecution service.

The title of Article 13 was changed from (Measures by the Chief Prosecutor) to (Measures by the Head of a District Prosecution Service), and the actors in paragraphs (1) and (2) also became the head of a district prosecution service. Article 20 (2) moved the basis of the procedure for disposal of execution property, etc. from "the provisions on the handling of seized articles and collection pursuant to Article 11 of the Prosecutors' Office Act" to the same provisions "pursuant to Article 58 of the Prosecution Service Act," and the main text of Article 21 changed the counterpart "Chief Prosecutor" for orders and transmission of documents and for reports and transmission of documents to "the head of a district prosecution service" in each instance. The title of Article 21 (via the Prosecutor General), the wording requiring transmission through the Prosecutor General, and the proviso concerning the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials remain unchanged.

조문으로 확인할 것

The materials reviewed were the reasons for enactment and amendment, the amendment text, and the table of comparison of old and new provisions (compared with the previous Act No. 21449) at the original text link (https://www.law.go.kr/LSW/lsInfoP.do?lsiSeq=290713), and the current Articles 11, 13, 20, and 21 opened via the Korean-language address of the Korea Law Information Center on 2026-10-16 (in force October 2, 2026). All four provisions bear an indication of amendment dated March 24, 2026, and Article 13 bears an indication of amendment of the title. Article 11 (1), which designates the Minister of Justice as the actor making the return decision, was not changed.

Article 58 of the Prosecution Service Act, referenced in Article 20 (2), when opened via the Korean-language address on the same day, was, under the title (Delegated Provisions), a provision stating that matters concerning the affairs of the Prosecution Service, prosecution services at each level, and branch offices shall be prescribed by Ministry of Justice Order, and the current indication is Act No. 21991 (partially amended September 29, 2026). Because that Ministry of Justice Order was not opened, it could not be confirmed what specifically the provisions on the handling of seized articles and collection are.

The provisions of the body of the Prosecution Service Act prescribing the status and authority of the head of a district prosecution service, and the transitional measures in the Supplementary Provisions of the Prosecution Service Act, are omitted from the original text page and were not reviewed.

입법에 묻는 것

The reasons for enactment of the Prosecution Service Act explain that the Prosecution Service is placed in correspondence with the Supreme Court, metropolitan prosecution services with the High Courts, and district prosecution services with the District Courts and Family Courts. This Act designated only the head of a district prosecution service as the counterpart for the enforcement of returns; is there no role performed at the metropolitan prosecution service stage in return cases, and what is the reason for that choice?

Article 21 continues to route orders and reports between the Minister of Justice and the head of a district prosecution service through the Prosecutor General. Inasmuch as the reasons for enactment state that direction and supervision over prosecutorial affairs are to be received pursuant to Act, is explanation not needed as to what basis and function this routing structure has in the return procedure under international mutual legal assistance?

The basis in Article 20 (2) has been moved to the delegation provision of Ministry of Justice Order. After the effective date of 2026-10-02, does the procedure for disposal of execution property, etc. continue with the same content as the provisions of the former Prosecutors' Office Act system, and if the adjustment of subordinate legislation has not been completed, what is the basis for the procedure in the interim?

다시 볼 조건

This note will be rewritten when the original text of the provisions on seized articles and collection among the Ministry of Justice Orders under Article 58 of the Prosecution Service Act is reviewed, or when that Ministry of Justice Order is enacted or amended, and when the Enforcement Decree of this Act is adjusted to the same effect.

Given that the Prosecution Service Act was already partially amended on September 29, 2026, if a further amendment changes the number or content of Article 58, the citation in Article 20 (2) will be compared against the original text again.