RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    미국의 개인정보보호법제에 대한 분석과 시사점 = Some Analyses on the Legal Regime of Data Protection in the United States

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A346499

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    The current United States legal regime of data protection can be characterized by a sort of dual and sectoral system. The "dual" means that the personal data in the public and private sectors are protected by the distinct protection laws respectively. The "sectoral" means that there is no comprehensive data protection law in the private sector. In this sense, the current Korean legal regime is similar to the United States. But the two countries are very different in that the United States has had a strict and efficient regulatory system of data protection for a long time in the public sector while it has focused on some sort of market-centered self-regulation in the private sector.
    This article describes the United States legal regime of data protection, especially the enforcement system in the public and private sectors, and then picks out some suggestive points for the Korean regime. Chapter II considers the United States dual and sectoral legislative system and its theoretical background. Chapter III describes the current, various data protection laws in the United States, Chapter IV analyzes the enforcement system of the public sector in the federal level. Chapter V explains the enforcement system of the private sector in the federal level.
    The suggestive points for the Korean data protection regime are as follows:
    First, the suggestive significance of the United States differentiated approach between public and private sectors consists in the difference of philosophy and protection level in both sectors. In fact, since the dangers of privacy violations in the public sector are higher than in the private sector, the public one need to have more strict regulatory regime than the private one. The current Korean regime is out of balance between the both sectors. The Korean data protection mechanisms in the public one is feeble and insufficient.
    Second, the American Privacy Act regulates the common use of records through the method of computer matching between two agencies. But the Korean counterpart Act does not regulate the computer matching.
    Third, the United States data protection regime in the private sector have made best use of the market-centered self-regulation while recognizing the value and necessity of processing consumer's data. The Korean regime should not depend heavily upon the public regulatory mechanism in the private sector.
    번역하기

    The current United States legal regime of data protection can be characterized by a sort of dual and sectoral system. The "dual" means that the personal data in the public and private sectors are protected by the distinct protection laws respectively....

    The current United States legal regime of data protection can be characterized by a sort of dual and sectoral system. The "dual" means that the personal data in the public and private sectors are protected by the distinct protection laws respectively. The "sectoral" means that there is no comprehensive data protection law in the private sector. In this sense, the current Korean legal regime is similar to the United States. But the two countries are very different in that the United States has had a strict and efficient regulatory system of data protection for a long time in the public sector while it has focused on some sort of market-centered self-regulation in the private sector.
    This article describes the United States legal regime of data protection, especially the enforcement system in the public and private sectors, and then picks out some suggestive points for the Korean regime. Chapter II considers the United States dual and sectoral legislative system and its theoretical background. Chapter III describes the current, various data protection laws in the United States, Chapter IV analyzes the enforcement system of the public sector in the federal level. Chapter V explains the enforcement system of the private sector in the federal level.
    The suggestive points for the Korean data protection regime are as follows:
    First, the suggestive significance of the United States differentiated approach between public and private sectors consists in the difference of philosophy and protection level in both sectors. In fact, since the dangers of privacy violations in the public sector are higher than in the private sector, the public one need to have more strict regulatory regime than the private one. The current Korean regime is out of balance between the both sectors. The Korean data protection mechanisms in the public one is feeble and insufficient.
    Second, the American Privacy Act regulates the common use of records through the method of computer matching between two agencies. But the Korean counterpart Act does not regulate the computer matching.
    Third, the United States data protection regime in the private sector have made best use of the market-centered self-regulation while recognizing the value and necessity of processing consumer's data. The Korean regime should not depend heavily upon the public regulatory mechanism in the private sector.

    더보기

    목차 (Table of Contents)

    • Ⅰ. 머리말
    • Ⅱ. 이원적·부문별 입법모델과 그 이론적 배경
    • 1. 공공부문에서의 엄격한 공법적 규제
    • 2. 민간부문에서의 시장중심의 부문별 규제
    • Ⅲ. 보호입법의 체계와 현황
    • Ⅰ. 머리말
    • Ⅱ. 이원적·부문별 입법모델과 그 이론적 배경
    • 1. 공공부문에서의 엄격한 공법적 규제
    • 2. 민간부문에서의 시장중심의 부문별 규제
    • Ⅲ. 보호입법의 체계와 현황
    • Ⅳ. 공공부문의 집행체계
    • 1. 개별 공공기관의 시행책임과 집행규칙의 공표
    • 2. 공공기관 내부의 1차적인 권리구제절차
    • 3. 관리예산처에 의한 외부감독 및 지원
    • 4. 컴퓨터결합에 대한 특별집행절차
    • 5. 프라이버시영향평가제도
    • Ⅴ. 민간부문의 집행체계
    • 1. 소비자정도 부문의 집행체계
    • 2. 의료정보 부문의 집행체계
    • Ⅵ. 시사점 : 결론을 대신하여
    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼