When a subordinate reported him as an executive who abused power, a high-ranking official who recorded the contents of a private conversation with resentment was sentenced to imprisonment in an appeals trial.

According to the legal community today (30th), the Criminal Division of the 1st to 3rd Divisions of the Daejeon High Court (Presiding Judge Lee Heung-joo) sentenced Mr. A (50), who was charged with violating the Protection of Communications Secrets Act, to 8 months in prison and 1 year probation, the same as the lower court. kept

Mr. A, a director-general-level public official, was angry at being reported to the audit office by employee B at the end of January of last year, so at the end of April of the same year, Mr. B placed his cell phone with a recording app on his desk for an hour and a half. is accused of recording conversations with another employee.

Mr. B filed a grievance complaint, saying that Mr. A had used his superior position to abuse his power, such as giving unfair instructions.

The first trial sentenced a suspended prison sentence, saying, "The accused secretly recorded the victims' conversations and invaded their privacy, and the crime is not light, and the victims also want punishment."

However, Mr. A appealed on the grounds of unfair sentencing, saying, "If the sentence of the centrifugal trial is confirmed, the resignation will be processed as a matter of course."

In response, the appellate court said, "The defendant recorded the conversation in an illegal way to find fault with Mr. B or to secure evidence in his favor." It's difficult," he said, dismissing A's appeal.

Enlarge Image

Meanwhile, according to the Protection of Communications Secrets Act, a person who 'records or listens' to 'undisclosed conversation' is subject to criminal punishment, and evidence obtained in this way cannot be used as evidence in a trial or disciplinary procedure.

In addition, apart from criminal liability, the act of one party recording a conversation without the consent of the other party may be a civil tort.

This is because such recording may violate the constitutional 'voice right' and 'secret and freedom of privacy' of the person being recorded, depending on the case.

Looking at court rulings, the court specifically asked the recorder whether the recording was the only method of evidence or whether there was a need and urgency to record without consent ▲ whether the recording did not violate the private life or secret area of ​​the person being recorded. ▲ Whether the recording was used limitedly for the purpose of litigation or investigation ▲ Whether the recording did not violate the Protection of Communications Secrets Act, etc.

If you meet all the requirements, you can increase the possibility of escaping civil and criminal liability even if the recording is without the consent of the other party.