Your Answer ▼
There are many arguments about the effect of the judgment by the jury. Some people agree on the advantages of it because of fairness. However, others illustrate that it might have side effects like emotional thinking. It is a significant topic in our society. Therefore, this essay will describe its describes the pros and cons of it.
To begin with, it can make a trial more fair to make a decision by not only judges but also the jury. The result by the majority is usually more acceptable and neutral to criminals than the one by primary judgments. For example, in Korea, there were several cases in which judges received the money from others and adjudged invalid decisions. These cases led leaded people to lose their reliability about the law because they thought a few judgments can make the result that they want. The jury can prevent unfair judgment and people, even though criminals, can keep their rights.
On the other hand, the trial by jury has negative factors. Especially, the jury is are not professional about the law (참고로, 법관과 '비교해서' 덜 전문적이다라고 적는 게 좋습니다.), so they can be emotional rather than rational in their judgment. For instance, the criminal, who killed a lot of people brutally, appealed to the jury againt against his situation that he had to take care of his young children in the court. Most of the jury thought he was so pathetic regardless of his crimes and argued that the judge had to reduce the period which the criminal might receive. Eventually, he received a light punishment even though he told lies. This is clearly to say that the judgment might be turned to the wrong way by a jury and it can threaten our society with the release of as releasing criminals again without proper punishment.
In conclusion, it is clear that there are many benefits of the jury because of impartiality. However, there are also noticeable drawbacks because the jury rarely have experiences to judge others through law. |