logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2016.01.18 2015고정1388
개인정보보호법위반
Text

Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,00, and by a fine of KRW 4,000,000, respectively.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

In principle, a personal information manager shall not process (collection, creation, linkage, linkage, records, storage, holding, processing, editing, search, output, correction, restoration, provision, disclosure, destruction, and other similar acts) personally identifiable information prescribed by Presidential Decree, which is assigned to identify an individual in accordance with Acts and subordinate statutes.

1. From June 26, 2013 to March 5, 2014, Defendant A, using ten telephone numbers, such as F leased from “E,” at the office of Suwon-gu C and the office of the company in charge of the settlement of accounts for the second floor, carried out the business of carrying out an adult tele-phoneing. Defendant A, who had 13,537 users enter the resident registration numbers on the ground of adult certification.

The above Defendant collected 13,537 resident registration numbers, which are unique distinctive information, by automatically storing their resident registration numbers in the management server without the consent of the above users.

2. Defendant B, from November 1, 2013 to March 5, 2014, used five telephone numbers, such as I leased from “E” at the Busan Shipping Daegu G and H office in the K office in the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., and had 254 users enter the resident registration numbers on the ground of adult certification.

The above Defendant collected 254 resident registration numbers, which are unique distinctive information, by automatically storing their resident registration numbers in the management server without the consent of the above users.

Summary of Evidence

1. Each statement made by the Defendants in this Act

1. Each statement made by the J (one-time) prepared by the prosecution, and by the K of each certified copy of the suspect examination protocol prepared by the prosecution;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes described above, such as reporting internal investigation (a search and seizure server analysis and specifying the number of individual information by company) prepared by the police;

1. Article 71 Subparag. 4 and Article 24 Subparag. 1 of the Personal Information Protection Act for criminal facts, and Article 19 Subparag. 1 of the Enforcement Decree of the Personal Information Protection Act for the choice of punishment (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 201Da124

arrow