미국의 디지털 성범죄 피해자에 대한 경제적 지원 법제 연구 -미국 연방의 아동성착취물 피해자에 대한 배상 및 경제적 지원을 중심으로- = Study on Monetary Assistance for Victims of Digital Sexual Crimes in the United States:Focusing on Restitution and Monetary Assistance for Child Pornography Victims under U.S. Federal Law

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In Korea, support for victims of digital sexual crime has primarily focused on the removal of illicit videos. However, given the challenges in removing videos hosted on overseas servers and the fact that removal alone cannot fully restore a victim’s losses, the necessity of providing monetary assistance cannot be overlooked.
In the United States, reforms to the relevant institutional framework have focused on civil remedies and restitution. Title 18 of the United States Code - Crimes and Criminal Procedure - contains a provision for civil remedies(18 U.S.C. § 2255) and a provision for mandatory restitution orders (18 U.S.C. § 2259). Section 2255, which had been amended over time to recognize broad exceptions to the statute of limitations, ultimately abolished the limitations in 2022.
As for Section 2259, a major point of contention had been the amount of restitution that specific distributors or possessors should pay to a victim. Finally, through the 2018 amendment, criteria for determining the scope of restitution were established, and victims can choose to receive defined monetary assistance from the fund. The amendment was grounded in the recognition that child pornography and digital sexual crimes are characterized by additional harm can occur through further distribution long after the initial production; that when material is distributed by numerous individuals, it is difficult to calculate the scope of one distributor’s or possessor’s liability; and that the restoration of a victim’s losses should not depend on the offender’s financial means.
Considering this U.S. relevant institutional framework, and the recent amendment to ‘Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes’ —which now requires mandatory forfeiture of criminal proceeds from digital sexual crimes— it would be reasonable to use criminal proceeds as a financial resource to provide monetary assistance to victims. At the same time, it would be necessary to establish guidelines for monetary assistance that take into account the unique characteristics of digital sexual crimes. Current guidelines impose strict limitations on the period of coverage and the requirements for covering treatment costs. These guidelines should be amended to allow exceptions in light of the nature of digital sexual crimes. On the other hand, as in the United States, the amount of monetary assistance could be predetermined, but a cautious approach would be advisable.