beta
(영문) 대법원 2018.01.24 2015도16508

개인정보보호법위반

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Article 59 Subparag. 2 of the Personal Information Protection Act provides that “No person who has managed or processed personal information shall divulge personal information that he/she has become aware of in the course of his/her duties or provide such information to another person without authority.” Article 71 Subparag. 5 of the same Act provides that “a person who divulges personal information he/she has become aware of in the course of his/her duties in violation of Article 59 Subparag. 2 or provides such information to another person without authority, and a person who knowingly receives such personal information for profit or unjust

As seen above, the latter part of Article 71 subparag. 5 of the Personal Information Protection Act only prescribes that a person who knowingly received personal information for profit or for an illegal purpose is punished, and there is no restriction on who provides such information, and considering the legislative purpose of the Personal Information Protection Act, if a person who manages or received personal information knowingly knows that he/she disclosed or provided such information to another person without authority, he/she can be deemed to fall under the “person who received personal information” under Article 71 subparag. 5 of the Personal Information Protection Act even if he/she was not directly provided with personal information from a person who manages or handled such information, even if he/she was not provided with such personal information for profit or unjust purpose.

2. The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, managed personal information by the Defendant.

A was not directly provided with personal information from A

Even if A is aware of the fact that personal information was provided to another person without authority, it constitutes an element of Article 71 subparag. 5 of the Personal Information Protection Act as long as A received such personal information again from B who received such personal information for profit or for an illegal purpose.