1. Purposes

Approximate 100,000 young offenders committed crimes every year, and ratio of young offenders occupied almost 40% so that young offenders should be given better treatment to prevent them from committing a crime again. To fulfil an ideology of the Juvenile Act by giving young offenders better treatment in accordance with protection of the youth, investigation into the youth should be done enough to meet young offender's characteristics. This study examined not only reformation of investigation into young offenders but also professionalism of the ones who investigated young offenders to solve problems of efficiency and professionalism that were made by overlap and delay of the investigation system.

2. Methodologies

In this study, literature research, statistical analysis, in-depth interview, questionnaires, prosecutor pre-determination investigation and investigation into records, etc were used. The literature research investigated values history and functions of not only the Juvenile Act but also investigation into young offenders, and statistical analysis did actual conditions, trends and treatment of young offenders, and various kinds of investigations. And, questionnaire survey and in-depth interview were used to investigate prosecutors, judges, probation officers, juvenile protection education institution's officers, and the court's investigators of juvenile delinquents, and to examine actual conditions, problems and reformation of juvenile investigations. Lastly, investigation into prosecutor pre-determination investigation was done to examine disposal determinants when investigators gave opinions.

3. The Findings

A) Trends of Juvenile Crimes

Last 10 years, number of young offenders fluctuated: The number decreased from 2000 to 2005, that is to say, 143,643 persons in 2000 and 67,478 persons in 2005; On the other hand, the number increased from 2006 to 2008, that is to say, 69,211 persons in 2006, 88,104 persons in 2007 and 134,992 persons in 2008: And, the number recorded 113,022 persons in 2009, 16.3% down than that in 2008 that needed to consider changes of age basis of young offenders in accordance with revision of the Juvenile Act that was effective on June 22, 2008 to lower age basis from 19-years old to 18-years old. If 19-years old young offenders (19,429 persons) were included in 2009, number of young offenders recorded 132,451 persons not to decrease much than that in 2008. In 2010, number of young offenders recorded 89,776 persons to be 20.6% down than that in 2009. If 19-years old young offenders (18,570 persons) were included in 2010, number of young offenders recorded 108,346 persons to decrease greatly than that in 2009. Since 2005, number of young offenders increased, and since 2008, the number decreased again. Even when 19-years old young offenders were included, the number decreased since 2008.
Number of criminals per 100,000 young people was to increase when they were old, for instance, 9.4 persons at less than 14-years old, 2,293.8 persons at 14 to 15-years old, 2,552.7 persons at 16 to 17-years old, and 2,189 persons at 18-years old. In 2010, number of young offenders was: 5.8 persons at less than 14-years old, 1,777.4 persons at 14 to 15-years old, 2,533.3 persons at 16 to 17-years old, and 2,123.1 persons at 18-years old. Number of criminals per 100,000 young people at 16 to 17-years old was the largest, and ratio of young offenders at less than 14-years old as well as 14 to 15-years old decreased greatly than it was in previous year.
The ratio of young offenders who had no ex-conviction fluctuated at 60% level, for instance, 64.5% in 2000 and 61.7% in 2010. Since 2008, the ratio rather decreased to increase ex-convict. In particular, ratio of ex-convict with four criminal convictions increased, for instance, 7.1% in 2008, 8.8% in 2009 and 10.7% in 2010.
Since 2000, prosecutors' office prosecuted young offenders: In 2000, non-prosecution recorded 50.4% to be the highest, followed by prosecution of 30.7% and sending of juvenile court at criminal court (소년부송치) of 17% in order: On the other hand, in 2005, non-prosecution recorded 60% to be the highest, followed by sending of juvenile court at criminal court (소년부송치) of 20.1% and prosecution of 16.8% in order so that the order made change. Since then, the order remained unchanged.
In 2010, non-prosecution recorded 58.7% to be the highest, followed by sending of juvenile court (소년부송치) of 33.6% and prosecution of 6.1%: So, rate of prosection was lowered to be one fifth of that in 2000, and that of sending of juvenile court rose almost 2 times.

B) Investigation into Young Offenders

The probation officers investigated young offenders: Number of court pre-determination investigation increased remarkably, for instance, 3,274 cases in 2009, 5,758 cases in 2010 and 5,270 cases as of August 2011; On the other hand, number of prosecutor pre-determination investigation also increased remarkably, for instance, 3,670 cases in 2009, and 4,524 cases in 2010. And, number of presentence investigation decreased remarkably, for instance, 1,178 cases in 2009, 701 cases in 2010, and 498 cases as of August, 2011: This was because the court asked investigation officer of court to investigate criminal cases to lessen number of investigation cases that probation officers investigated.
The Seoul Family Court's investigation officer of juvenile crimes investigated criminal cases: In 2010, number of juvenile crimes recorded 1,128 cases, in other words, common investigation of 34.3% to be the highest, followed by education of 33% and teen court of 12.5%. As of October 27, 2011, number of juvenile crimes recorded 1,144 cases in total, for instance, common investigation of 40% to be the highest, followed by education of 27.9% and teen court of 12.9%.

C) Questionnaire Survey/ in-depth Interview, and Record Investigation to investigate judges and prosecutors who asked for investigation, and investigation officers

In this study, 204 investigation officers said that 'probation and parole office having no investigation department' was of problem to be the largest problem among 19 questions (3.34 of 4 points), followed by 'shortage of investigation officers' (3.29), 'overburden of investigation of each investigation officer' (3.27), 'non-investigation officer's investigation because of job rotation' (2.98), and 'shortage of reeducation and education time in favor of investigation officers' (2.96) in order.
The probation and parole office without investigation department was of serious problem (50.0%) and of a little problem (38.2%), and job burden of investigation officer was of serious problem (42.2%) and of a little problem (44.1%).
The investigation officers thought of reformation of investigation system; for instance, 'shortage of investigation officers' (34.3%), 'job burden of each one of the officer' (16.7%), and 'probation and parole office without investigation department' (11.8%). On the other hand, the officers thought of problems of investigation system; for instance, 'shortage of investigation officers' (55.4%), 'job burden of each one of the officer' (47.1%), 'probation and parole office without investigation department' (37.3%), 'non-inspection officers' inspection because of job rotation' and 'shortage of reeducation and education time of inspection officers (28.9%), and 'request for inspection of unimportant cases (because of performance of request for inspection)' (19.6%). The judges and prosecutors thought of reformation of investigation system, for instance, 'shortage of treatment program in accordance with the inspection' (2.90 of 4 points) to be the highest, followed by 'absence of inspection officer in charge of young offenders' (2.78 points), 'shortage of professional inspectors' (2.76 points), and 'inspection of non-professional inspectors because of job rotation' in order. The judges and prosecutors thought of problem of shortage of treatment program at inspection, for instance, very much problem (15.7%) and a little problems (51.5%).
The inspection system of young offenders needed to reform, for instance, shortage of inspection officers (22.2%) to be the highest, followed by absence of inspection officers in charge of young offenders (15.9%), no standard risk assessment tool by crime type (14.3%) and shortage of treatment program at inspection (12.7%). Multiple answers of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd order were: shortage of treatment program at inspection (42.9%) to be the highest, followed by absence of inspection officers in charge of young offenders (34.9%) and no standard risk assessment tool by crime type (33.3%).
The study inspected records of prosecutor pre-determination investigation on factors of inspection officers opinions: The inspection officers' final opinions, in other words, determination on whether stay of prosecution or sending of juvenile court was significantly influenced by prior planning, interest in crime motives, preparation for pocket money, accidental crime motives, number of same kinds of ex-conviction case, history of crimes against persons, agreement with damages and losses, living at same house with biological parents, mother's affection, educational background and family's protection ability. In other words, important factors included; 1) prior planning of the crime, crime motives of making of walking around money and/or pocket money, accidental crime motives, 2) crime history and recovery of damages and losses such as number of same kind of ex conviction, prior crime history of crimes against persons, 3) living environment such as living at same house with biological parents, and mother's affection, 4) educational background, 5) drinking, 6) family's protection ability (will of the changes, and supporting environment).
Prosecutors' disposal decision, in other words, factors having influence upon stay of prosecution and sending of juvenile court was influenced by gender, number of disposal type in the past, number of same kinds of ex-conviction, smoking, and protector's protection ability (Hong Yeong-oh et al (2009)).
On the other hand, judges' judgment was influenced by ages, occupation, crime history, same kind of ex-conviction, age of first commitment of the crime, performance of probation and parole, parental relations, father's educational background, father's occupation, monthly income of household, protector's protection ability, number of times of runaway from home, age of first runaway from home, number of times of movement, final educational background, experience of drop out of school, academic performance, behavioral development, attendance at school, peer relation, name of the crime, crime motives, crime planning, recovery of losses and damages, and companion in crime. But, judge's judgement was not influenced by gender, physical and mental disability, structural defect such as parents' death and/or divorce, functional defects, joining in the crime and drinking when committing a crime.

4. Problems and Political Alternatives of Juvenile Delinquent Investigation System

The study suggested reformation that could solve overlap of juvenile delinquent investigation and develop investigation officers' professionalism based on the findings of questionnaire survey and interview, and it discussed not only stage of prosecutors' office but also stage of court (trial) that had inspection officers.

A) Overlap of the Investigation

In this study, various kinds of investigation against young offenders could be done in overlap at stages of investigation, trial and corrections. So, the study suggested reformation, for instance, information sharing and cooperation between inspection agencies, improvement of investigation methods as well as forms of investigation s, scope of the ones for inspection, adjustment of roles of each investigation agency, and settlement of overlap between investigation agencies.

1) Information Sharing and Cooperation between Inspection Agencies
Investigation into young offenders shall solve not only overlap of investigation procedures but also shortage of information sharing. So, each inspection agency shall strengthen connection of information and material collection. As YOIS(Youth Offending Information System) in the UK did, KICS(Korean Integrated Criminal System) in Korea was valid and effective in accordance with the Act on IT Promotion of the Criminal Justice Procedures from the year of 2010 to promote IT of criminal justice procedures and to produce , fair and transparent criminal justice procedures. So, the study examined use of KICS. But, KICS that shares electronic of investigation, prosecution and trial is not permitted to share investigation and disposal of quality and environment for processing of cases of young offenders: So, Korean Youth Offending Information System is needed to set up and to share information on juvenile justice as YOIS in the UK does.

2) Reformation of Investigation Methods and Forms of Investigation
In this study, the questionnaire survey found that not only investigation contents' values and inspection officers' opinions at prosecutor pre-determination investigation as well as judge pre-judgment investigation but also opinion on second offense risks was almost similar each other.
An alternative can avoid overlap of the investigation to reflect realities of which investigation types did not differ much, and to unify forms of the investigation, and to add necessary contents only of each investigation type, and to add investigation into life and environment during vacant investigation time. For instance, forms of investigation can be unified by each investigation type, and behavior observation at classification and investigation shall be added to either prosecutor pre-determination inspection or court pre-determination inspection.

3) Scope of the Subject
In 2010, prosecutors prosecuted 70,045 young offenders according to the Criminal Act, and no more than 4,524 young offenders (6.5%) were given prosecutor pre-determination inspection by probation and parole office.
The young offender protection cases (소년보호사건) were prosecuted as follow: In 2010, 45,090 young offenders were prosecuted according to young offender protection case (소년보호사건), and no more than 11,024 young offenders (24.4%) were given juvenile protection education as well as counseling and investigation. Most of juvenile delinquents were prosecuted without scientific and professional material that followed ideology of protection of young people. To decide upon scope of the subject, investigation shall be done to determine prosecution and young offender's characteristics being suitable to each prosecution. To give young offenders individual treatment and prosecute them properly, an analysis shall be done to find out young offenders' characteristics that can be suitable to each prosecution. The case was applied to prosecutor pre-determination investigation, court pre-determination investigation, juvenile protection education and counseling & investigation that young offenders could be prosecuted in various ways according to investigation results. For instance, prosecutor pre-determination investigation shall do not prosecution, stay of prosecution and sending of juvenile court (소년부송치) but investigation into young offenders who have various kinds of diversions depending upon disposal determination to give young offenders individual treatment according to purposes of the Juvenile Act. At investigation into young offenders who have been given sending of juvenile court, protection types varied according to recent revision of the Juvenile Act to meet revision of the Act and to adopt new systems such as reconciliation (화해권고), juvenile participatory trial system, psychological counseling and investigation order (심리상담조사명령), and education before disposal. And, various kinds of protection disposal types and systems need to investigate them.

4) Roles of Investigation Agencies
Working group of investigation agencies can investigate in overlap. Not only the police but also prosecutors' office may investigate at investigation stage and court stage to have different and inherent functions of officers' inspection, juvenile protection education and pre-sentence investigation system that have different nature, procedures and methods.
The probation and parole office can do prosecutor pre-determination investigation, presentence investigation and court pre-determination investigation, and juvenile classification institution can do classification inspection as well as counseling investigation to investigate talent and qualification of young offenders consigned whom other inspection officers could not inspect, and inspection officers who investigated juvenile criminals had better inspect young offenders requiring protection at juvenile court.
As said before, ratio of sending of juvenile court increased remarkably, and various kinds of probation were applied to young offenders according to the Juvenile Act. To meet the Juvenile Act's ideology and give the most proper individual treatment, in-depth investigation should be done. 29 investigation officers in the nation who are currently investigating young offenders at family court mostly had multiple jobs so that inspection officers at the court had better inspect young offenders requiring protection (보호소년). In particular, the family court shall put new systems into practice according to characteristics of young offenders, for instance, juvenile participatory trial, psychological counseling and investigation order (심리상담조사명령), and education before disposal. At the court per-determination investigation, probation officer had better inspect young offenders who have experienced probation, and inspection officers in charge of young offenders had better inspect remaining young offenders.

5) Overlapping of Investigation Officers
Overlapped investigation was practically discussed at investigation into sentencing material, in particular, overlapping of not only presentence investigation by probation officer but also presentence investigation by investigation officer of court. This study examined argument on investigation officers of presentence investigation to suggest unified direction at the area of delinquent youth investigation.
The study suggested desirable unification of delinquent youth investigation:
Officer of presentence investigation shall be elected not by difference of litigation structure and/or legal system but by collection of presentence investigation by fair and objective investigation based on knowledge and job independence of professionals at investigation into sentencing factors. Legislative policy such as introduction of a system shall always consider not only ideals of the system but also effective use of justice resources. Therefore, considering legal system in Korea, probation officers had better do presentence investigation because they have long time experience and excellent knowhow and have close relations with probation as well as treatment of defendants.
Rate of sending of juvenile court of inspection officers of court rose, and probation against young offenders varied very much in accordance with revision of the Juvenile Act, and the Family Court introduced new systems such as juvenile participatory trial system, psychological counseling and investigation order, and education before disposal (처분전 훈육) depending upon young offenders' characteristics to require various kinds of investigations: So, delinquent youth investigation officers (소년조사관) and inspection officers of court had better inspect young offenders requiring protection (보호소년).

B) Inspection Officers and Professional Inspection

In this study, probation officers, juvenile protection education officers and delinquent youth inspection officers thought of the greatest problem that probation and parole office had no inspection department, followed by shortage of inspection officers, job burden of each one of inspection officer, non-inspection officer's involvement in inspection according to job rotation, and shortage of reeducation and education time of inspection officers. The interviewees thought that shortage of inspection officers was the greatest problem considering inspection system of delinquent youth (34.3%), followed by job burden of each one of the officer (16.7%), and probation and parole office without inspection department (11.8%). The interviewees said that shortage of inspection officers was the 1st, 2nd and 3rd ranked problem (55.4%), followed by job burden of each one of the officer (47.1%), probation and parole office without inspection department (37.3%), and not only non-inspection officer's involvement in inspection according to job rotation but also shortage of reeducation and education time of inspection officers (28.9%).

1) Professional Inspection of the Officers
Probation and parole officers could not be appointed properly considering their ability and characteristics because of shortage of the officers to have difficulties at investigation because of job burden. Jobs of probation and parole officers, juvenile protection education officers and delinquent youth inspection officers of court increased every year because of introduction of new inspection systems: So, the officers were unable to inspect young offenders without recruitment and to be difficult to meet purposes of various kinds of investigation systems. The recruitment was essentially needed. Introduction of probation after imprisonment has been recently discussed so that recruitment of officers in charge of investigation only would be difficult. Considering values of investigation to do individual treatment according to ideology of protection of delinquent youth, investigation officers should be recruited. The criminal justice procedure had better have good system, and investigation officers should be recruited to attain goals and purposes of the system. Considering young people's nature being different form that of the adult, inspection officers in charge of young offenders are needed, and they are in short supply.
The Ministry of Justice recently introduced accreditation system of inspection officers to elevate reliability of the inspection. As said before, not only accreditation system of inspection officers but also accreditation system of inspection officers in charge of young offenders is needed. Investigation officers in charge of young offenders shall have knowledge and ideas on juvenile psychology and characteristics, young people's delinquent behavior and crimes, and characteristics and factors of juvenile second offense. Inspection officers shall be employed and appointed not by job rotation but by good inspection ability to let them devote to inspection job. For instance, in the United States, probation officers in charge of presentence investigation who have bachelor's degree of psychology, criminal policy science, crime science, and sociology shall be employed and recruited not by job rotation but by professional knowledge and ability.

2) Educational Opportunity for Inspection Officers
Inspection officers has been educated and trained until now, and current curriculum is unable to elevate probation officers' professional knowledge and ability of probation officers in charge of presentence inspection. At in-depth interview with the officers, they said that they were unable to be educated because of job burden. When the inspection officers were educated at other places than judicial research and training institute and/or research and training institute of court, they were forced to pay tuition fees privately. Even if the officers wanted to be educated by paying tuition fees privately, they were not given educational opportunity because of job burden at shortage of investigation officers.
And, the officers could be given educational opportunities of either psychological inspection and other inspection subjects or reeducation at colleges and/or consulting organizations. The officers are demanded to attend lectures and/or workshops of graduate schools and consulting organizations. Business cooperation agreement with a college shall be made to develop special curriculum, and business agreement with counseling organization shall be made to develop a curriculum to educate and train the officers continuously. The officers shall be educated outlines and guidelines of testing of second offense risks that is being used at various kinds of investigations and psychological tests.

3) Assessment Tools of Second Offense Risks by Each Type of Crime
Judges and prosecutors (57.2%) thought that no standard risk assessment tool of each crime type would be of problem, and inspection officers (59.3%) did. And, applicants to the inspection (14.3%) and inspection officers (14.8%) that 'no standard risk testing tool of each crime type should be firstly solved.
Investigation officers' opinions and assessment on second offense risks were not made based on objective standards to rely upon personal experience according to the followings: Second offense risks at the questionnaire survey, factors weighted at suggestion of inspection officers' opinions, inspection officers' final opinions at prosecutor pre-determination inspection, in other words, factors having significant influence upon decision of either stay of prosecution or sending of juvenile court, and inspection officers' opinions at presentence investigation of the Ministry of Justice (2006), and factors having influence upon final decision of juvenile protection education. Therefore, not only inspection officers' opinions but also second offense risks should be tested according to objective standards, for which standardized risk assessment tools shall be urgently developed to test second offense risks in scientific way and to suggest it to inspection officers' opinions.
Development and enforcement of risk assessment tool is said to be at intial stage so that studies on second offense shall be developed to make use of reliable and appropriate tool continuously and to clarify second offense factors.
But, in Korea, research on second offense is not easy to do. The inspection officers shall be allowed to inquire of crime history to research second offense: However, currently, protection of private information has been emphasized so much to be difficult to research second offense. Scholars of second offense research were interested in not criminals' private information but second offense. For scientific purpose, a way that can inspect second offense to exclude information of private persons shall be developed. If not, information analysis can be done at National Police Agency and/or Prosecution
Service and other places, and computers of National Police Agency and/or Prosecution Service shall be allowed to make use of them for analysis purpose.

5. Summary

In this study, investigation system should be used to realize ideology of the Juvenile Act by individual treatment according to protection of young people and to make use of inspection system that can meet characteristics of the Act:
And, the study suggested not only reformation of investigation system of young offenders but also professionalism of inspection officers to solve low efficiency and special skills that could be produced because of overlap and delay of current inspection systems. The study investigated actual conditions and problems of operations of various kinds of investigations, judges, prosecutors and inspection officers by questionnaire survey and in-depth interview.
Revision of the Juvenile Act that was effective from June 22, 2008 diversified kinds and contents of protection disposal (보호처분) to put an emphasis upon ideology of restorative justice of treatment of young offenders: And, revision of the Juvenile Act that was effective from June 22, 2008 introduced not only guarantee of victim's right to make a statement but also reconciliation (화해권고). In other words, the Act considered a victim's requests to enact provision that could incorporate offenders into the community again, so that it could settle conflicts between concerned parties autonomously to make base of restorative justice. Seoul Family Court put new systems into practice to realize restorative justice; for instance, reconciliation (화해권고), juvenile participatory trial system, psychological counseling & investigation order, and education prior to disposal (처분전 훈육). Juvenile delinquents requiring protection could be given various kinds of disposals, so that delinquent youth investigation system should be developed at the stage of trial to meet its purposes.
As said before, the study could not investigate factors having influence upon inspection officers' opinions on prosecutor pre-determination inspection, presentence investigation and juvenile protection education because of difference of research methods and contents of the records by using one frame. Therefore, researches shall be done to investigate records by using one frame to clarify factors of opinions of inspection officers and to examine factors that can have influence upon decisions of prosecutors and judges. In-depth study is needed to give ground of inspection officer's opinions by inspecting second offense factors of young offenders. Inquiry into crime history was difficult so far to prevent researchers from investigating forecast of second offense of young offenders. In this study, weight of second offense risk assessment of investigation officers differed from that of check of the officers a little. The weights varied depending upon inspection officers.
Inspection officers, prosecutors and judges have put an emphasis upon development of second crime risk assessment tools, for which justice authority shall actively support to inquire of crime history and to investigate second offense risk factors of young offenders by each type of crime and to develop assessment tools.