Decisions

All

TITLE	Supreme Court Decision 2019Do4938 Decided February 17, 2022 【Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes (Taking Photographs or Videos by Using Cameras)】 [full Text]
Summary
【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] In a case where an investigation agency seized a medium containing electronic information the suspect had voluntarily submitted and did not inquire into the kind of information therein that is subject to submission, the scope of information subject to seizure In a case where the suspect voluntarily submits to an investigation agency a medium containing both electronic information related to facts underlying a criminal charge and electronic information irrelevant to the criminal charge, and the said investigation agency searches, copies, and prints the information at its office, whether the investigation agency must guarantee that the suspect participates in the process and provide an inventory specifying the seized electronic information (affirmative), and where search and seizure may be considered justifiable even though the investigative agency failed to take such measures [2] In the case where: (a) the Defendant was indicted on the charge of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes (Taking Photographs or Videos by Using Cameras) by taking photographs of the bodies of unidentified victims with his mobile phone contrary to the will of the victims (“Crimes No. 1 to 7”) and secretly taking photographs of the legs of a victim who was wearing a short skirt and waiting for the traffic light to turn green in front of the crosswalk (“Crime No. 8”); and (b) the police officer, who was called to the scene by the victim of Crime No. 8, seized the mobile phone that had been voluntarily submitted by the Defendant at the scene and found the videos of Crimes No. 1 to 7 while searching the seized mobile phone at the agency’s office, the case holding that the CD containing the printed version of the videos recording Crimes No. 1 to 7 and the copied file thereof has been generated from the electronic information lawfully seized by voluntary submission and is thus admissible as evidence

TITLE

Supreme Court Decision 2019Do4938 Decided February 17, 2022 【Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes (Taking Photographs or Videos by Using Cameras)】 [full Text]

Summary

【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] In a case where an investigation agency seized a medium containing electronic information the suspect had voluntarily submitted and did not inquire into the kind of information therein that is subject to submission, the scope of information subject to seizure In a case where the suspect voluntarily submits to an investigation agency a medium containing both electronic information related to facts underlying a criminal charge and electronic information irrelevant to the criminal charge, and the said investigation agency searches, copies, and prints the information at its office, whether the investigation agency must guarantee that the suspect participates in the process and provide an inventory specifying the seized electronic information (affirmative), and where search and seizure may be considered justifiable even though the investigative agency failed to take such measures [2] In the case where: (a) the Defendant was indicted on the charge of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes (Taking Photographs or Videos by Using Cameras) by taking photographs of the bodies of unidentified victims with his mobile phone contrary to the will of the victims (“Crimes No. 1 to 7”) and secretly taking photographs of the legs of a victim who was wearing a short skirt and waiting for the traffic light to turn green in front of the crosswalk (“Crime No. 8”); and (b) the police officer, who was called to the scene by the victim of Crime No. 8, seized the mobile phone that had been voluntarily submitted by the Defendant at the scene and found the videos of Crimes No. 1 to 7 while searching the seized mobile phone at the agency’s office, the case holding that the CD containing the printed version of the videos recording Crimes No. 1 to 7 and the copied file thereof has been generated from the electronic information lawfully seized by voluntary submission and is thus admissible as evidence

Prev	Supreme Court Decision 2021Da275741 Decided February 17, 2022 【Damages (Etc.)】
Next	Supreme Court Decision 2018Du36592 Decided February 10, 2022 【Lawsuit Claiming for Revocation of Disposition Refusing to Refund Withheld Corporate Tax】

list