logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2014.09.26 2014고정2434
개인정보보호법위반
Text

The defendant shall be innocent.

Reasons

1. On November 2012, the Defendant: (a) operated the cell phone number (G) of D’s cell phone number (G) stored in D’s cell phone in D’s office located in Busan Jin-gu, Busan, without the victim’s consent; and (b) acquired D’s cell phone number (G) stored in D’s cell phone.

Accordingly, the Defendant violated the Personal Information Protection Act by acquiring personal information by illegal means or by other means.

2. According to Article 72 Subparag. 2 and Article 59 Subparag. 1 of the Personal Information Protection Act, where a person who has managed or processed personal information acquires personal information or obtains consent to the management thereof by fraud or other improper means, he/she shall be punished by imprisonment with labor for not more than three years or by a fine not exceeding 30 million won. According to Article 2 Subparag. 5 of the said Act, “personal information manager” means a public institution, legal entity, organization, individual, etc. that manages personal information directly or through another person to manage personal information files for the purpose

According to each evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, D's cell phone with the defendant, as stated in the facts charged, has been phoneed from his female-friendly Gu, and at the time, the defendant's phone number was known by manipulating the above mobile phone due to the lack of location D at the time.

However, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone was in the status of collecting and processing the above mobile phone numbers to operate personal information files for business purposes.

It is difficult to recognize the fact that the defendant is a "personal information manager" as provided in the above Personal Information Protection Act, such as that he/she processed personal information such as the above mobile phone number through another person, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. In conclusion, the facts charged of this case are without proof of crime.

arrow