개인정보보호법상의 형사처벌 규정에 관한 연구

정혜욱(Choung, Hye-Uk) 중앙대학교 법학연구원 2011 法學論文集 Vol.35 No.3

Previously, Korean personal information protection was considered to be incomplete for covering only the public affairs. On September 30th, 2011, however, Korea enacted personal information protection act and extended its coverage by including private affairs. Since then, Korean personal information protection has become an intact system. The momentum for this extension of the protection range was served by the major personal information leakages centered on the private enterprises. ‘SK Broadband’, ‘Auction online auctioning site’, ‘Hyundai Capital’ cases are the few examples. legal benefit the personal information protection act essentially protects is the rights of informational self-determination. The rights of informational self-determination directly originated from the privacy act, article 17 of the constitutional law. Similar to tranquility of the habitat, personal information falls into the area of privacy and therefore is the subject of constitutional protection. Even though the protection for personal information is the fundamental human rights prescribed by the constitutional law, the absence of practical act to support its protection led to deal its violation only by civil means.as personal information protection law is enacted along with corresponding penalty, the rights of informational self-determination became one of the fundamental human rights that is directly protected by the constitutional law. Violation of the rights of informational self-determination has the property of intruding the control of personal information by the subject of rights. According to this property, the collection and processing of the personal information under the subject’s consent is exempted from the punishment.there exists an opposition between how one would describe the exemption of the penalty under consent of the subject of information. One is by distinguishing between agreement which removes the elements of an offense and approval which precludes the wrongfulness. The other one is by deciding either on the circumstances of the removing the elements of an offence or the circumstances precluding wrongfulness. For the latter case, it is often said that it is practically impossible to distinguish between approval and agreement and that no benefit arises from such distinction. However, this is not the case. the violation of the rights of informational self-determination, the consent of the information subject should be considered as agreement that removes the elements of an offence. This is analogous to theft where the violation of ownership of the goods occur. For example, if the owner of goods gives consent and the other acquires them, the elements of an offence are not comprisable.offender of the violation of the rights of informational self-determination is fundamentally the information processor. Here, the information processor can be public institution, corporation, organization, or individuals, etc. who, for business purposes, wish to process personal information by themselves or through the means of other people. According to this definition, all the people who process personal information is the offender. The basic structure of the system is as follows. The person in charge of the information processing is subjected to punishment as offender and the corresponding corporation or organization is fined only when it is subjected to penalty against employer and employee.the violation of the rights of informational self-determination is subjected to punishment except the collection of information without consent. In regards to collection, if the collector does not receive consent from the information subject, only the fine will be levied on him. However, if he commits fraud while obtaining consents, he is subjected to punishment.

개인정보 활용 및 보호에 대한 개인의 개인정보관리 인식 유형 연구

박미영 한국지역정보화학회 2026 한국지역정보화학회지 Vol.29 No.2

AI 및 빅데이터 기술의 발전으로 개인정보를 포함한 데이터 활용이 확대되면서, 개인정보 활용과 개인정보 관리에 대한 개인 인식의 차이가 중요한 사회적 이슈로 부상하고 있다. 우리나라는 2020년 데이터 3 법 개정을 통해 개인정보 활용의 제도적 기반을 마련하였으나, 개인정보 보호와 관리에 대한 개인의 인식은 여전히 다양한 양상을 보이고 있다. 이에 본 연구는 개인정보 활용 및 개인정보 관리에 대한 개인의 주관적 인식 유형을 탐색하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 이를 위해 본 연구는 Q방법론을 적용하여 33개의 Q진술문을 분석한 결과, 개인의 인식은 세 가지 유형으로 도출되었다. 첫째, 개인정보 보호를 중시하며 개인정보관리에 있어 개인의 권리를 강조하는 유형, 둘째, 개인정보 활용을 중시하며 개인정보 관리의 주체로 기업을 신뢰하는 유형, 셋째, 개인정보에 무관심하며 개인정보 관리에 있어 국가에 의존하는 유형이다. 본 연구는 이러한 인식 유형을 바탕으로 개인정보 활용과 개인정보 관리 정책의 효과적 설계와 집행을 위한 정책적・실천적 시사점을 제시하며, 데이터 3법의 정책 마련과 실무 현장에서의 기초자료로 활용될 수 있음을시사한다. With the advancement of artificial intelligence and big data technologies, the use of data containing personal information has expanded, making differences in individuals’ perceptions of personal information utilization and personal information management an important social issue. In South Korea, the 2020 amendments to the Three Data Acts established an institutional foundation for the use of personal information. However, individuals’ perceptions of personal information protection and management continue to vary considerably. Against this background, this study aims to explore the types of individuals’ subjective perceptions regarding personal information utilization and personal information management. To this end, this study applied Q methodology and analyzed 33 Q statements. The results identified three distinct types of perceptions. The first type emphasizes personal information protection and individual rights in the management of personal information. The second type values the utilization of personal information and trusts corporations as the primary actors in personal information management. The third type shows relative indifference toward personal information and depends on the state for personal information management. Based on these perception types, this study presents policy and practical implications for the effective design and implementation of policies related to personal information utilization and management. The findings also suggest that the study can serve as foundational material for policymaking related to the Three Data Acts and for practical applications in relevant fields.

정보통신기술의 발전과 개인정보 보호

손영화 한국기업법학회 2022 企業法硏究 Vol.36 No.1

Humans value being protected in the areas of privacy and personal life. I want to be able to control who knows what about themselves. I don't want anyone to have access to their personal information at any time. However, recent advances in information and communication technology threaten privacy, reduce control over personal information, and open the possibility of various negative consequences as a result of access to personal information. In the late 20th century, a data protection system was established in response to an increase in the level of personal information processing. In the 21st century, the strength of the platform economy is beginning with the rise of big data and advanced information technology (e.g., in the form of deep learning), the rise of big tech companies, and the storage and processing of exabytes of data. Technical features are currently in place to collect, store and retrieve large amounts of data on phone calls, Internet searches, and electronic payments, and are routinely used by both government agencies and business actors. The large-scale use and spread of advanced digital technology for the rise, surveillance and control of China has raised concerns among many people. For companies, personal information about customers and prospects is now a key asset. The scope and purpose of the privacy-oriented business models of big tech companies such as Google, Amazon, Facebook, Microsoft, and Apple are often referred to as "monitoring capitalism." This paper compares and examines legislative precedents and theories of the United States, Japan and other countries, focusing on the EU, and examines the issues of personal information protection accompanying the development of new information and communication technologies. A brief summary is as follows: Appropriate regulation and protection must be implemented while accurately recognizing the impact of new technologies on personal information and privacy. First, there is the problem of regulating the use of so-called cookies with regard to Internet privacy. It will be necessary to find a point of contact to achieve information sharing and sharing efficiency without over-infringement of individual privacy. Second, it is necessary to address the issue of privacy in the development of cloud computing in an internationally consistent manner. Third, there is the problem of protecting personal information through the utilization of big data. In particular, the extent to which individual privacy protection is permitted is a problem when using so-called predictive information. It is also necessary to come up with a concrete plan to ban the use of predictive information by case rather than a general plan to ban the use of predictive information. Fourth, with the development of the Internet of Things, the possibility of infringement of personal information is increasing. Utilization of location information using GPS is one of them. Generally, the acquisition and use of personal information using “reconfigurable technology” can be solved by informing individuals of such information. Fifth, the development of information and communication technology can bring about changes in the voting process. This is the so-called e-governance or e-government. Electronic democracy should be achieved by allowing voters to vote freely and secretly at any stage, and by preventing the sale and coercion of votes. Finally, the so-called surveillance capitalism, which is a reaction to the development of security systems using surveillance cameras, should be resolved. At least national surveillance of citizens should be strictly prohibited, and laws and systems should be established to inform the public of such surveillance facts and prevent personal privacy from being violated when using information. 인간은 사생활과 개인 삶의 영역을 보호받는 것을 중요시한다. 자신의 개인정보에 대하여 언제든지 누구라도 접근할 수 있는 것을 원하지 않는다. 또한 타인이 자신에 대해 무엇을 알고 있는지에 대하여 통제할 수 있기를 원한다. 그러나 최근 정보통신기술의 발전은 프라이버시를 위협하고 개인정보에 대한 통제력을 감소시키며 개인정보에 대한 다양한 접근의 결과로 인한 부정적인 결과가 발생할 가능성이 있다. 20세기 후반에는 개인정보의 처리 수준 증가에 대한 대응으로 데이터 보호체제가 구축되었다. 21세기는 빅데이터와 첨단 정보기술(예: 딥러닝의 형태), 빅테크 기업의 부상과 엑사바이트급 데이터 저장 및 처리와 함께 플랫폼 경제의 세기가 시작되고 있다. 전화 통화, 인터넷 검색 및 전자 결제에 관한 대량의 데이터를 수집, 저장 및 검색할 수 있는 기술적 기능이 현재 마련되어 있다. 정부 기관과 기업 행위자 모두가 그러한 기술을 일상적으로 사용하고 있다. 중국의 부상과 감시와 통제를 위한 첨단 디지털 기술의 대규모 사용과 확산은 많은 사람들의 우려를 자아내고 있다. 기업에게는 고객과 잠재 고객에 대한 개인정보가 이제 핵심 자산이기도 하다. 빅테크(Google, Amazon, Facebook, Microsoft, Apple)의 개인정보 중심 비즈니스 모델의 범위와 목적은 ‘감시 자본주의’라는 표현을 자아내기도 한다. 이상에서는 EU를 중심으로 미국, 일본 등의 입법과 판례 및 학설을 비교고찰하며 새로운 정보통신기술의 발전에 따른 개인정보 보호의 과제를 살펴보았다. 간략하게 요약 정리하면 다음과 같다. 신기술의 홍수 속에서 그것이 개인정보와 프라이버시에 미치는 영향에 대해 정확히 인식하면서 적절한 규제와 보호가 이루어질 필요가 있다. 우선, 인터넷 프라이버시(Internet privacy)와 관련하여 이른바 쿠키(cookies)의 사용에 관한 규제의 문제가 있다. 개인의 프라이버시를 과도하게 침해하지 않으면서 정보공유 및 공유효율성을 달성하기 위한 접점을 찾아야 할 것이다. 둘째, 클라우드 컴퓨팅의 발달에 따른 개인정보 보호의 문제에 대해 국제정합성 있는 규범의 마련을 위한 노력이 경주되어야 할 것이다. 셋째, 빅데이터의 이용 및 활용에 따른 개인정보 보호의 문제가 있다. 특히, 이른바 예측정보의 활용에 있어서 개인의 프라이버시 보호를 어느 범위에서 인정할 것인지가 문제된다. 예측정보의 일반적인 활용금지의 방안이 아닌 구체적인 사안별 금지방안을 마련할 필요도 있다. 넷째, 사물인터넷의 발전에 따라 개인정보의 침해 가능성도 높아지고 있다. GPS를 이용한 위치정보 등의 이용과 활용도 그러한 내용 중의 하나이다. 일반적으로 ‘재구성 가능한 기술(reconfigurable technology)’을 사용한 개인정보의 취득 및 이용의 경우 그러한 기술의 정보에 대하여 개인에게 알려주는 방법에 의하여 이를 해결할 수 있을 것이다. 다섯째, 정보통신기술의 발전은 투표 과정에서의 변화를 초래할 수 있다. 이른바 E-거버넌스 또는 전자정부의 과제이다. 어느 단계에서의 기술이용이든지 간에 유권자의 자유투표 및 비밀투표가 이루어질 수 있도록 하여 투표매매와 강요를 방지함으로써 전자 민주주의를 달성하여야 할 것이다. 마지막으로 감시카메라 등을 이용한 보안시스템의 발전에 따른 반작용이라고 할 수 있는 이른바 감시 자본주의를 해결하지 않으면 안된다. 적어도 국가에 의한 대중의 감시는 엄 ...

위탁자의 개인정보보호 관리역량 제고에 관한 연구

정환석 ( Hwan-suk Cheong ),박억남 ( Euk-nam Park ),이상준 ( Sang-joon Lee ) 한국인터넷정보학회 2016 인터넷정보학회논문지 Vol.17 No.4

Personal information processing works, including resident registration number is common to be consigned by IT specialized company due to high level expertise and tremendous cost. The accident related to personal information is increasing and most of accidents are caused by the consignee`s leaking information. According to the Inspection of personal information protection and the management level diagnosis of personal information protection, public Institutions need to build the consignee`s accident prevention and personal information management system as soon as possible. In this paper, the efficient enhancement ways for the personal information protection is studied. We analyze the law of business consignment and select basic management items related with personal information protection, and propose a analysis scheme for management level of personal information protection and a enhancement scheme for management system of personal information protection. This paper suggests consignee`s management system of personal information protection for the enhancement way and the three Strengthening ways in law. To compose the a enhancement scheme for management system of personal information protection, we conduct questionnaire survey to 30 consignees(IT maintenance, notice printing, call center, welfare center) related to typical tasks of public organizations, present reference for this scheme, and execute verification of this scheme by focus group interview of consignor and consignee.

Study on the Construction of a Mechanism to Coordinate Interests in the Exercise of the Right to Transfer Personal Information

Guangjun Zhang(?光君),Kexin Zheng(?可欣) 동아대학교 법학연구소 2022 東亞法學 Vol.- No.97

중국의 개인정보보호법은 처음으로 개인정보양도권을 확립하고 국가인터넷정보통신부가 관련 시행세칙을 제정하도록 허가 하고 있다. 개인정보 이전권은 유럽연합 일반 데이터 보호 규정에서 정한 데이터 이전 권리에 대한 제안이지만 개인정보 이전 권리를 행사하는 과정에서 제3자 플랫폼과 원 플랫폼 간 이해 충돌이 발생할 수 있다. 이익 조정 메커니즘의 구축은 관련 시행 규칙을 제정하는 핵심 과제로 개인정보 이전권 행사의 장벽을 줄이는 데 도움이 되어 개인정보를 잘 활용할 수 있고 동시에 잘 보호할 수 있다. “오늘의 헤드라인” 사례는 개인정보이전에 따른 이해충돌의 복잡성을 잘 보여주고 있으며, 조정메커니즘을 시급히 구축해야 할 필요성이 있음을 잘 보여주고 있다. 개인정보 이전권의 체계적인 권리구조를 구축함으로써 개인정보 이전권이 데이터 휴대권과 다르다는 특수성을 보여준다. 충돌하는 두 플랫폼의 각각의 이익을 분석해 볼 때, 어느 일방에게만 유리하게 보호하는 것은 바람직하지 않다. 각계각층의 다양한 이해관계를 조율할 수 있는 장치가 마련돼야 한다. 그 내용으로 다음과 같은 방안이 제시될 수 있다. 첫째, 비용분담 메커니즘을 구축할 필요가 있다. 제3자 플랫폼은 대가 지급을 통해 기존 플랫폼과 개인정보 이전 비용을 공동 부담한다.원래 플랫폼은 독립적으로 인증 비용을 부담하며 다양한 유형의 개인정보에 따라 다양한 인증방법과 프로세스를 채택한다. 둘째, 의무분배 메커니즘을 수립해야 한다. 기존 플랫폼은 제3자 플랫폼의 컴플라이언스 의무 이행 능력을 심사해 이행 능력이 부족한 제3자 플랫폼에 도움을 줘야 하지만, 일정 기간 후 탈퇴할 수 있는 메커니즘을 설정할 필요가 있다. 전송의무에서 정보이전을 이전단계와 환원단계로 구분하여 의무의 분배. 보안 의무 측면에서 기존 플랫폼이 주요 책임을 지고 제3자 플랫폼이 보조 책임을 지며 보험 가입을 통해 위험을 균등하게 부담한다. China’s Personal Information Protection Law establishes the right to transfer personal information for the first time and authorizes the state Internet information department to formulate relevant implementation rules. Although the right to transfer personal information is a limitation of the right to carry data as stipulated in the EU General Data Protection Regulation(GDPR), the process of exercising the right to transfer personal information still leads to conflict of interests between the third-party platform and the original platform. Constructing a mechanism for coordination of interests is a key task in formulating relevant implementation rules, which is conducive to reducing resistance to the exercise of the right to transfer personal information and realizing the dual purpose of “strong use and protection” of personal information. The introduction of the “Today’s headlines case” highlights the complexity of the conflict of interest in the transfer of personal information and illustrates the urgency of constructing a mechanism for coordination of interests. Then, we systematically construct the right structure of the right to transfer personal information and reveal its special features that distinguish it from the right to carry data. The analysis of the respective interests of the two platforms shows that it is not desirable to adopt a single value orientation for protection, but rather to construct a coordination mechanism for the coexistence of multiple interests. Further, in the process of exercising the right to transfer personal information, it is necessary to balance the interests of the original platform and the third-party platform in terms of cost-sharing mechanism and obligation-sharing mechanism. First, about the cost-sharing mechanism. The third-party platform should share the cost of transferring personal information with the original platform by paying the consideration; the cost of identity verification should be borne by the original platform independently, and the way and process of identity verification should be distinguished according to the type of personal information. Secondly, about the obligation sharing mechanism. The original platform shall review the third-party platform’s ability to fulfill compliance obligations and provide assistance to those with insufficient ability to fulfill obligations, but set up an exit mechanism within a certain period of time; among the transmission obligations, distinguish between transfer and restoration for obligation sharing; among the security obligations, the original platform shall bear the main responsibility while the third-party platform shall bear the auxiliary responsibility, and share the risks among them equally by purchasing insurance.

개인정보의 개념에 대한 논의와 법적 과제

김현경(Kim, Hyunkyung) 미국헌법학회 2014 미국헌법연구 Vol.25 No.2

“Personal data” is a central concept in privacy regulation. This term defines the scope and boundaries of many privacy statutes and regulations. However, since the concept of personal data is too wide and uncertain, it is inconvenient to apply and enforce the laws. Therefore, in this Essay, after looking at the approach ways to the concept of personal information in the United States and EU, I try to suggest future legal challenges that reflect the characteristics of the legal concept of personal information The reason why personal data is more important as Legal concept is due to the development of information processing technology. Because of the abuse of personal data collected, personal or property damage was caused to the data subject. In addition, personal information is currently business asset indispensable in order to conduct business associated with the Internet and somtimes should be opened to the public in order to ensure the freedom of expression. In the United States, the law provides multiple explanations of this term. so that increases the regulatory maze and associated compliance costs for regulated entities, and as a consequence of the multiple possibilities flowing from the three classifications of personal data, the same information may or may not be personal data under different statutes and in different processing contexts. In contrast, in the European Union, there is a single definition, and one that defines personal information broadly to encompass all information that is identifiable to a person, so the EU’s definition of personal information risks sweeping too broadly. The Personal Data Protection Act of Korea adopts the way of EU defining the concept of personal data but since special laws regulating personal credit information, medical information, educational information, etc. are applied to the related cases in the first, it can be said that the third method of the United States is also taken as part of a combination. Therefore it can be appeared combination of defects in the United States and EU law in Korea. To make privacy law effective for the future, with regard to legislation on personal data, factors to consider are as follows: First specific guidelines should be provided to determine whether or not a certain information is personal information. Secondly it is desirable that the use on proprietary value of personal information is regulated by self-regulation between the parties. Finally lower level of regulation should be applied to the simple personal information that is not a file or database.

최근 개인정보자기결정권의 동향

백윤철 ( Yun Chul Ba다 ) 단국대학교 법학연구소 2014 법학논총 Vol.38 No.3

The Information Privacy Rights is the one of the rights that private information can impact on personal life right to control the subject itself. And the difference between Information Privacy Rights and the privacy of the information that traditionally used, based on the information that the privacy of an individual`s private life that is free physical space for decision-making has been to emphasize the exclusion of interference in the traditional sense, and it has privacy and discrimination. For information about privacy rights violations during the most. It is about the CCTV, ``CCTV`` technology for the installation of the expansion of the protection of human rights of the people first think to protect your personal information, and keeping with the principles of the Constitution prohibits excessive ``CCTV`` evidence of ability to admit the evidence. But still ``CCTV`` idea of a view of the installation is a panacea, which is a violation of people`s privacy rights and information about Portrait rights has been forgotten. ``CCTV`` needs and the installation of at least keeping with the principles of the constitutional prohibition must be installed. In addition, installation of domestic airport`s full body scanner become a concern at the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport. Which violate the principles of the Constitution prohibits the excess can be seen as examples. In addition to the Human Rights Commission, the National Pension Corporation personal information from unauthorized view of human rights violations against the recommendation was sitting reading room at the National University Library Person of human rights violations by fingerprint identification system also recommended that measures to protect the personal information. In this perspective, ironically, the current protection of personal information is protecting by Human Rights Committee, rather than the Committee of Personal Information Protection Because of privacy laws are enacted, protection of personal information should not have blind spots, but still protecting personal information law system can not be committed. As I described, the protection of personal information does not abolished, so Act on the Protection of Personal Combine Information have been conflicted with privacy laws. and privacy during work on the important work that the Personal Information Dispute Mediation Committee role. Privacy Commissioner of deliberation and voting rights, but it does not have a ministerial committee that is only good semblance. Thus, the original intent of the Privacy Act that people have the right to receive privacy established by the specific identification method and the abolition of privacy, Privacy Commissioner is able to function with different legal status of their permanent status and country Council also operates as same. If the committee of personal information protection can not function it as they described, the Human Rights Commissioner could possibly protect the basic human rights.

개인정보 보호와 인격권 : 사법(私法) 측면에서의 검토

권태상 梨花女子大學校 法學硏究所 2013 법학논집 Vol.17 No.4

정보통신기술의 발전으로 정보를 대량으로 저장하고 이를 쉽게 이용할 수 있게 되면서, 정보가 유출되거나 다른 목적으로 이용될 위험성도 증가하였다. 개인정보를 보호할 필요성으로는, 다른 범죄에 악용될 위험성이 있는 점, 개인의 사생활을 보호해야 하는 점, 개인의 인격 발현을 보호해야 하는 점 등이 제시된다. 반면에 현대의 정보화사회에서 개인정보의 자유로운 이용을 보장하는 것이 필요하다는 점도 인정된다. 개인정보의 이용 필요성으로는, 사회전체의 효율성 증진, 자유로운 표현행위와 이를 통한 진실의 발견 등이 제시된다. 미국의 경우, 프라이버시권의 내용이 판례 등에 의하여 점차 확장되면서, 정보 프라이버시(information privacy) 개념이 인정되었다. 정보 프라이버시권 개념은 현재 일반적으로 받아들여지는 것으로 보이며, 이에 근거하여 많은 법률들이 제정되었다. 독일의 경우, 일반적 인격권에 의해 자기결정권을 보호해 왔는데, 정보 보호의 필요성이 커지면서 일반적 인격권의 내용으로 정보자기결정권(Recht auf informationelle Selbstbestimmung)을 인정하였다. 이러한 정보자기결정권 개념은 연방정보보호법 등 법률과 판례에 많은 영향을 끼쳤다. 개인정보는 그 자체가 인격을 나타낼 수 있고, 개인정보의 공개와 이용에 대하여 결정하는 것 자체가 인격의 발현이라고 볼 수 있다. 그리고 개인정보의 공개와 이용에 대하여 스스로 결정할 수 없다면, 이후 정보주체는 인격을 자유롭게 발현하기 어렵게 될 것이다. 또한, 개인정보의 공개와 이용은 인간의 존엄성에도 영향을 미칠 수 있다. 이처럼 개인정보의 공개와 이용이 인격의 발현과 인간의 존엄성에 직접 영향을 미칠 수 있으므로, 개인정보에 관한 권리는 사법(私法)의 차원에서 인격권으로 파악해야 할 것이다. 정보자기결정권의 법적 근거가 헌법 제10조인지, 헌법 제17조인지 다투어지고 있으나, 어느 견해에 의하든 정보자기결정권은 사법(私法)에서 인격권으로 파악해야 할 것이다. 개인정보에 관한 인격권이 침해되었는지 여부는 우선 개인정보 보호법 등의 법률에 규정된 절차 등이 제대로 준수되었는지를 기준으로 판단해야 할 것이다. 그리고 이러한 법률이 직접 적용되지 않는 사안에서는 다른 이익과의 형량을 통하여 그 침해 여부를 판단해야 할 것이다. 개인정보에 관한 인격권이 침해된 경우, 금지청구권을 인정하는 것이 타당하다. 개인정보 보호법 에 규정된 열람요구권, 정정․삭제 요구권, 처리정지요구권 등도 금지청구권과 관련되는 것으로 보인다. 또한, 개인정보에 관한 인격권이 침해된 경우, 피해자는 계약책임 또는 불법행위책임으로 손해배상을 청구할 수 있다. 개인정보에 관한 인격권이 침해되면 항상 정신적 손해에 대한 배상책임이 인정되는지 문제된다. 최근 이를 부정하는 취지의 판결이 선고되기도 하였으나, 정보주체의 결정권 자체가 침해된 것이므로 이로 인한 정신적 손해를 인정하는 것이 보다 자연스러울 것이다. 손해배상청구와 관련하여, 개인정보 보호법은 개인 정보 처리자에게 고의 또는 과실에 대한 입증책임을 전환시키는 등 특별한 규정들을 두고 있다. There have been increasing needs for protection of personal information in Korea in order to protect privacy and development of personality as well as prevent the abuse of personal information. On the other hand, today’s information society also requires the freedom to use personal information to guarantee free expression and enhance the social efficiency. In the United States, information privacy is recognized as the scopes of the right to privacy has been expanded. In Germany, the right to informational self-determination is recognized as part of the general personality rights. Personal information may demonstrate personality and making decisions on disclosure or use of personal information can be considered as one aspect of personality development. If individuals are not allowed to make decisions on disclosure or use of their own personal information, they no longer have freedom of developing their personality and it may have impact on human dignity. For this reason, the rights on personal information should be understood as personality rights in private law. When personality rights on personal information are infringed, the injured party should have a right to request injunction and it may relate to claims for inspection, correction, deletion, and stopping processing in Personal Information Protection Act. In addition, the injured party could claim for damages based on breach of contract or torts. There is a special provision in Personal Information Protection Act to reverse the burden of proof on negligence.

个人金融信息应用的法律保护及路径选择探究

黄斯龙,박상식 동아대학교 법학연구소 2022 國際去來와 法 Vol.- No.37

With the increasing development of the Internet, people use more and more mobile phones, computers and other equipment, and personal information is more and more closely related to financial and other economic fields at any time. Therefore, today's personal financial information security is related to everyone's information rights and property rights. On the one hand, the development and progress of financial technology and the development of Internet finance have greatly promoted the circulation of social economy and capital, on the other hand, it has triggered thinking on the effective utilization and protection of personal financial information. All countries are actively exploring how to better protect the privacy of personal information with personal financial information as the core, hoping to achieve perfect legislation, effective legal implementation and relief means, which will promote the better protection of personal financial information. Especially under COVID-19, how to better protect the financial information privacy of citizens is a question worthy of our consideration. In view of the problems and challenges existing in the protection of personal financial information, especially the lack of laws on the protection of personal financial information, unclear responsibilities of personal financial information supervision departments, insufficient law enforcement means, unimpeded channels for consumer rights protection, and imperfect relief mechanism, this paper makes a comparative analysis and Research on the legal protection of personal information between China and South Korea, It is proposed that we should improve and promote the solution of relevant problems from the aspects of constructing a diversified solution mechanism for the legal protection of personal financial information and perfecting the legislation related to personal information. 互联网等日益发展,人们使用手机、计算机等设备越来越多,随时个人信息与金融等经济领域越发紧密。因此,当今个人金融信息安全关系到每个人的信息权益和财产权益,金融科技的发展进步以及互联网金融的发展一方面极大的促进了社会经济和资本的流通,另一方面引发对个人金融信息的有效利用及保护的思考。各个国家都在积极探索如何才能更好的保护以个人金融信息为核心的个人信息的隐私,希望能够做到完善的立法、有效的法律的实施以及救济手段,这些都将促进个人金融信息被更好的保护。特别是在新冠疫情下,如何才能更好地保护好公民个人的金融信息隐私,这是一个值得我们思考的问题。 本文针对个人金融信息方面保护存在的问题和挑战,特别是缺乏有关个人金融信息保护的法律、个人金融信息监管部门职责不清,执法手段不足以及消费维权渠道不够畅通,救济机制不够健全等方面,进行中国和韩国相关个人信息法律保护方面的对比分析研究,提出应该从构建个人金融信息法律保护的多元化解决机制以及完善个人金融信息相关立法等方面进行完善和促进相关问题的解决。

A Comparative Study of Consent Rules in the Personal Information Protection Laws of China and South Korea

GUANGJUN ZHANG(장광준),JIA JIANG 동아대학교 법학연구소 2022 國際去來와 法 Vol.- No.39

Consent rules, as the “Imperial Clauses” for personal information protection, are both specifically regulated in the Personal Information Protection Laws of China and South Korea. However, the explosive growth and high-speed circulation of personal information in the era of big data makes it more difficult for personal information processors to obtain the effective consent of personal information subjects, thereby weakening the ability of personal information subjects to control their personal information. How to apply consent rules to effectively balance the relationship between personal information protection and the development of the digital economy is one of the common topics faced by both China and South Korea. This paper compares the specific provisions and exceptions of the consent rules in the Personal Information Protection Laws of China and South Korea and analyzes the commonalities and differences between the two. Then, it compares the legal liability of violation of consent rules in the Personal Information Protection Laws of China and South Korea and analyzes their differences. Finally, from the two aspects of the validity of consent and the application of the rules, this paper summarizes the common dilemma faced by the consent rules of China and South Korea and proposes some solutions. Although the consent rules of the Personal Information Protection Laws of China and South Korea have their own advantages and disadvantages, on the whole, South Koreas regulations can better reflect the legislative purpose of “strong protection and strong utilization”. The flexibility and operability of law enforcement are stronger. The common dilemma of the two countries consent rules lies in the insufficient validity of consent and weak enforcement of rules. The former is mainly due to the personal information subjects are lack of cognitive ability, are “forced” to consent too much and are lack of enthusiasm for personal information management. The latter is mainly due to the deviation of the actual law enforcement from the original intention of the legislation, the difficulty of implementing the rules due to the development of science and technology, and the paradox of the consent rules themselves. In this regard, this paper proposes solutions from two aspects: perfecting the content of the rules and improving the implementation of the rules. The perfecting of the rules mainly includes four dimensions: refining the classification of personal information, optimizing the notification mode of personal information processors, supplementing the method of personal information subject consent, and reasonably restricting the exceptions to consent. The improvement of the implementation of the rules mainly includes four measures: introducing a third-party evaluation mechanism, strengthening government supervision, reinforcing legal responsibility, and implementing effective remedies.