In Article 43(1)5 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, the purport of the provision on “tele number” as one of the basic personal information to be submitted by a person subject to registration of personal information / In the interpretation of Article 3(1)5 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, whether a person subject to registration of personal information submits sufficient documents to enable contact either of his/her residence telephone number, cell phone number, or any other telephone number capable of contact (affirmative)

Article 43(1)5 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “Sexual Crimes Punishment Act”) provides that one of the basic personal information to be submitted by a person subject to registration of personal information to the head of the competent police station, etc. shall be “compons (referring to telephone numbers and e-mail addresses)” and Article 3(1)5(a) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree”) provides that “the telephone number, cell phone number, or other telephone numbers capable of contact” with respect to telephone numbers when determining the details of personal information to be submitted pursuant to the above provisions. Article 43(3) of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act provides that where the basic personal information submitted pursuant to Article 43(1) is modified, the person subject to registration of personal information shall be punished by a person who fails to submit changed information without justifiable grounds, in violation of Article 43(3)2 of the same Act.

The purpose of Article 43(1)5 of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act stipulating a telephone number as one of the basic personal information to be submitted by a person subject to registration of personal information is to secure a means by which the competent police station, etc. can promptly contact the person subject to registration of personal information. In addition, in light of the text form and content of Article 3(1)5 of the Enforcement Decree, it shall be interpreted that the person subject to registration of personal information shall not necessarily have to submit any telephone number, cell phone number, or any other telephone number that can contact with the person subject to registration of personal information.

Meanwhile, Articles 43(3) and 50(3)2 of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act provide that a person subject to registration of personal information shall be punished only when he/she fails to submit changed information without “justifiable cause.” In cases where a changed information is a telephone number, the determination of whether a person subject to registration of personal information is “justifiable cause” ought to be made based on a specific case in full view of the legislative intent of stipulating a telephone number as one of the basic personal information under the Sexual Violence Punishment Act, and the motive and background leading up to the failure to submit changed information, whether there was a result that makes it difficult to contact with a person subject to registration of personal information due to

Articles 43(1)5 and (3), and 50(3)2 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes; Article 3(1)5(a) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Yu Sung-sung et al.

Daejeon District Court Decision 2017No2452 Decided January 24, 2018

The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to Daejeon District Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Summary of the facts charged in this case

A defendant is a person subject to registration of personal information pursuant to the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “Sexual Crimes Punishment Act”). Where any personal information submitted is changed, a person subject to registration of personal information shall submit the reason and details thereof to the head of a police office having jurisdiction over his/her domicile within 20 days from the date on which the ground for such change occurred. Nevertheless, even if the contact information was changed on April 25, 2016, the defendant did not submit the reason and details thereof to the head of a police

2. The judgment of the court below

According to Article 3(1)5(a) of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (hereinafter “Enforcement Decree”), a telephone number from among contact numbers that a person subject to registration of personal information should submit (hereinafter “basic personal information”) includes “portable telephone number”, and the Defendant submitted information on a cell phone number as one of the basic personal information to the head of the competent police station. Therefore, even if the Defendant did not change his/her residence telephone number or other contact telephone number from among contact information submitted, he/she is obliged to submit information on the changed cell phone number as long as the mobile phone number is changed. Since the Defendant violated this without justifiable cause, it constitutes Article 50(3)2 of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act.

3. Judgment of the Supreme Court

A. Article 43(1)5 of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act provides that one of the basic personal information to be submitted by a person subject to registration of personal information to the head of the competent police station, etc. shall be “contain contact points (referring to telephone numbers and e-mail addresses)” and Article 3(1)5(a) of the Enforcement Decree provides that “the telephone number for residence, cell phone numbers, or other telephone numbers for contact” shall be “the telephone number for telephone numbers” with respect to telephone numbers when determining the details of personal information to be submitted in accordance with the above provision. Article 43(3) of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act provides that where the basic personal information submitted in accordance with Article 43(1) is changed, a person subject to registration of personal information shall submit changed information within 20 days from the date on which the ground for change occurred, and Article 50(3)2 of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act provides that a person who fails to submit changed information without justifiable grounds, in violation of Article 43(3)

B. The purport of Article 43(1)5 of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act stipulating a telephone number as one of the basic personal information to be submitted by a person subject to registration of personal information is to ensure that the competent police station, etc. can promptly contact the person subject to registration of personal information. In addition, in light of the language and text form and content of Article 3(1)5 of the Enforcement Decree, a person subject to registration of personal information shall be construed as not necessarily having to submit any telephone number, cell phone number, or any other telephone number available for contact.

Meanwhile, Articles 43(3) and 50(3)2 of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act provide that a person subject to registration of personal information shall be punished only when he/she fails to submit changed information without “justifiable cause.” In cases where a changed information is a telephone number, the determination of whether a person subject to registration of personal information is “justifiable cause” ought to be made based on a specific case in full view of the legislative intent of stipulating a telephone number as one of the basic personal information under the Sexual Violence Punishment Act, and the motive and background leading up to the failure to submit changed information, whether there was a result that makes it difficult to contact with a person subject to registration of personal information due to

C. The evidence duly admitted reveals the following facts.

(1) When the Defendant submitted basic personal information to the head of the competent police station, the Defendant submitted all his/her residence telephone numbers, mobile phone numbers, and workplace telephone numbers to the phone number, and subsequently, the mobile phone numbers submitted during the process of replacing the mobile phone devices were changed. However, the residence telephone numbers and the workplace telephone numbers were not changed.

(2) When changing the mobile phone number as above, the Defendant subscribed to the mobile phone change guidance service supported by the telecommunications company, and accordingly, received the mobile phone number using the changed mobile phone number when the phone was suffering from the previous mobile phone number.

(3) In order to check the change of the phone number, a police officer of the competent police station posted the phone number submitted by the Defendant, but did not receive the Defendant and sent the same text message to the same mobile phone number. The police officer immediately received the message from the changed mobile phone number, and approximately two minutes thereafter, sent the message to guide the changed mobile phone number, and the call was caused by the changed mobile phone number from the Defendant.

D. Examining the above facts in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, even if the Defendant did not submit a changed mobile phone number to the head of the competent police station within 20 days after the change of the mobile phone number, the competent police station was in a situation where contact with the Defendant was possible because the former telephone number and the workplace telephone number originally submitted was not changed, and it was in a situation where contact was possible for the Defendant to communicate with the former mobile phone number initially submitted through the Defendant’s mobile phone number change guidance service. Thus, it is difficult to view that the Defendant did not submit any changed information in violation of Article 43(3) of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act without justifiable grounds.

E. Nevertheless, the lower court determined otherwise, that the Defendant violated the duty to submit changed information without justifiable grounds. In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the interpretation and application of Articles 43(3) and 50(3)2 of the Sexual Violence Punishment Act, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. The Defendant’s ground of appeal assigning this error is with merit.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Ahn Jae-chul (Presiding Justice)