g interrogation of suspect. However, the scope of participation is restricted with an abstract and vague provision that restricts the right to participation based on ‘good cause.’ - Accordingly, in principle, the defense counsel may make comments only after interrogation, and the c ounsel may raise objection to any unfair interrogation manner and make a statement during the interrog ation only with ‘approval’ of the prosecutor or the senior judicial police officer. That is, the suspect ca nnot choose him/herself to which question he/she wants to receive comments from defense counsel. - Despite newly added provision of Article 243 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act in 2007, participatio n of defense counsel is not properly implemented, and this can be attributable to diverse factors includ ing the ignorance and burden of cost of accompanying legal counsel during interrogation and tight sum mon schedule by investigative institutions which does not give suspects enough time to appoint legal c ounsel before interrogation. 2) Questions - Please provide plans to guarantee practical participation right of defense counsel including maki ng comments freely during the process of investigation including interrogation, and suspects’ right to receive help from the legal counsel. 15. Improvement regarding Torture and Unfair Treatment 1) Current Status - The UN Human Rights Committee expressed its concern in the Concluding observation on the fourth periodic report of the Republic of Korea in 2015 that the “state party’s criminal legislation does not a dequately ensure that acts covered by the internationally accepted definition of torture are fully criminal ized, especially mental torture.” - The UN Committee against Torture also recommended in the Concluding observation on the third to fifth periodic report of the Republic of Korea in May 2017, that the state party should incorporate a d (3) The defense counsel who participates in the interrogation may make a statement on his/ her opinion after interrogation: Provided, That the counsel may raise an objection to any un fair interrogation manner even in the middle of the interrogation and may also make a state ment, with the approval from the prosecutor or the senior judicial police officer