‘특정중대범죄 피의자 등 신상정보 공개에 관한 법률’의 위헌성 검토 - 얼굴 사진 공개를 중심으로 - = Reviewing the Constitutionality of the “Act on the Disclosure of Personal Information of Specific Major Crime Suspects” - With a Focus on the Disclosure of Facial Photographs -

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The “Act on the Disclosure of Personal Information of Specific Major Crime Suspects”(hereinafter “the Act”) was enacted in October last year and came into effect on January 25, 2024. The Act is a general law regarding the disclosure of personal information of major crime suspects. The law regarding the disclosure of personal information has existed since before. The Act has been improved compared to previous laws by rationalizing the procedure for disclosing personal information and compensating for damages caused by incorrect disclosure of personal information. However, the Act has also increased the possibility of infringing upon the personality rights of the subjects by expanding the scope of personal information targets and forcibly photographing and disclosing the faces of suspects.
The unconstitutionality of disclosing personal information has been raised since the introduction of this system in the “Act on the Protection of Youth against Sexual Offenses” enacted in 2000. Despite the frequent claims that the system of disclosing personal information is unconstitutional, the Constitutional Court has consistently ruled in favor of the constitutionality of related cases. The system of disclosing personal information has gained public support and further developed every time a crime that caused social outrage occurred. The Act can be considered as a culmination of those developments. The most notable in the Act is the photographing of suspects’ faces by investigative agencies and the disclosure of those photos (Article 4, Paragraph 5), which is a new addition not found in previous laws. The act of state agencies photographing and disclosing suspects’ faces for the purpose of disclosure is significantly different from the previous system of passive disclosure of suspects’ investigative records held by state agencies and could be considered unconstitutional.
The photographing and disclosure of suspects’ faces under the Act may resemble mug shot system in the United States, but it is important to note that the two systems are significantly different. The latter involves taking mug shots for all individuals arrested for investigative purposes, categorizing them as public records, and then disclosing them to the public. Therefore, mug shots of not only individuals arrested for serious crimes but also those arrested for minor offenses are disclosed. In contrast, the former exceptionally mandates photographing and disclosing faces only of major criminals who are socially condemned. The stigmatizing effect on the subjects is greater in the former than the latter. The infringement on personality rights is also greater in the former than the latter. The photographing and disclosure of suspects’ faces under the Act are considered to have much greater potential for being unconstitutional than mug shots in the United States.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 이민영, "피의자의 얼굴 등 개인신상정보 공개에 관한 입법평가" (17) : 2020

2 강서영, "피의자 신상공개제도에 관한 헌법적 연구" 헌법재판연구원 2021

3 이인영, "피의사실공표죄의 허용요건으로서 피의자의 얼굴 등 정보공개에 관한 연구" 24 (24): 2023

4 김대성, "피의사실공표죄와 피의자 신상정보 공개에 대한 법적 검토와 개선방안" 45 (45): 2021

5 김지선, "중형주의 형사제재의 실효성 평가연구(Ⅰ): 신상정보등록 및 공개제도의 실효성 평가연구" 형사정책연구원 2020

6 문재완, "알 권리의 재구성 - 변호사시험법 제18조 제1항 위헌확인 사건의 판례 평석을겸하여 -" 44 (44): 2015

7 이경열, "성범죄자의 신상정보 공개와 범죄인의 잊혀질 권리" 33 (33): 2021

8 김두상, "성범죄자 신상등록제도의 개정에 관한 비판적 고찰" 25 (25): 2017

9 문재완, "성범죄자 신상공개제도 위헌성 재검토 - 미국의 메간법 판결과의 비교를 중심으로 -" 9 (9): 2003

10 강동욱, "범죄피의자의 신상공개에 대한 비판적 검토" 19 (19): 2019

11 황문규, "범죄정보 공개 적정범위에 관한 연구" 34 : 2018

12 문재완, "범죄보도와 무죄추정원칙" 19 (19): 2020

13 이혜환 ; 정지수, "강력범죄 피의자에 대한 신상공개 - 판단기준 분석과 정책변동론의 적용 -" 19 (19): 2019

14 박경규, "강력범죄 피의자 신상공개와 범죄자 인격권 보호 ②" (167) : 2023

15 박경규, "강력범죄 피의자 신상공개와 범죄자 인격권 보호 ①" (166) : 2023

16 장재성, "강력범죄 피의자 신상공개 제도의 법적 문제와 개선 방안" 21 (21): 2019

17 Fred H. Cate, "The Public Record: Information Privacy and Access – A New Framework for Finding the Balance"

18 Amy Gajda, "Mugshots and the Press-Privacy Dilemma" 93 : 1199-, 2019

19 Morgan E. Hammes, "Mugged of the Public Interest in Mug Shots : the Improper Balancing under Exemption 7(C)of the Freedom of Information Act" 57 : 397-, 2018

20 Eumi K. Lee, "Monetizing Shame: Mugshots, Privacy, and the Right to Access" 70 : 557-, 2018