"Cheering" vs "Witch Hunt": What Do You Think About Digital Prison?

Digital Prison Operator Forced Repatriated from Vietnam
Captured in Vietnam and Repatriated After 14 Days
Judiciary Criticized for 'Light Punishment'... Support Voices Amid Private Revenge Controversy
Claims That Private Sanctions Cannot Exist in a Rule of Law Country

Operator A of the first Digital Prison, who was captured in Vietnam, is being forcibly repatriated through Incheon International Airport on the morning of the 6th. [Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Han Seung-gon] As the operator of the website 'Digital Prison' was repatriated from Vietnam to South Korea on the 6th and is under police investigation, calls for the operator's release have emerged among some netizens, sparking controversy.

Although the site has posted personal information of innocent people unrelated to sexual crime allegations, causing social uproar, some appear to support private sanctions by an individual, citing the judiciary's weak punishment. Some express self-deprecating opinions, wondering how desperate the situation must be for this to happen.

The operator of Digital Prison, a man in his 30s identified as Mr. A, has been charged since March this year with unauthorized posting of personal information of suspects and related parties in cases such as digital sex crimes, murder, and child abuse, as well as court sentencing results, through the website and Instagram account (violation of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, etc.).

The site also posted personal information of those involved in the so-called 'Nth Room case,' where minors and women were threatened to produce sexual exploitation materials and sold to men for money.

The site includes a space for comments, where indiscriminate collective criticism continues even before trial results for the charges are announced. In a rule-of-law country, this effectively means an individual is punishing others solely based on allegations or involvement in sexual crime cases.

Digital Prison website screen [Image source=Yonhap News]

The problem lies in the fact that people completely unrelated to sexual crimes have had their personal information exposed and are suffering unjustly. Professor Chae Jeong-ho of the Department of Psychiatry at Catholic University Medical School and a university student who expressed grievances over the disclosure of personal information and took extreme measures are among those affected. Mr. A is currently being sued by the bereaved family.

It is reported that Professor Chae learned at the end of June that his name, phone number, and other personal information were posted on Digital Prison.

A photo capturing a Telegram conversation suggesting Professor Chae attempted to purchase sexual exploitation videos was also posted. However, police investigations revealed this to be completely unfounded.

Additionally, a university student whose personal information was exposed was found dead on the 5th of last month. Before passing, the student denied the sexual crime allegations posted on Digital Prison and pleaded innocence.

Despite these circumstances, some argue that Digital Prison should be maintained as is. Kim, a university student in his mid-20s, said, "Punishments related to sexual crimes are too weak, which is why such a site was created," and added, "I wish people would consider why this site is supported by some public opinion."

Another office worker in his 30s, also named Kim, stated, "The court may have issued sentences appropriate to the crimes, but ordinary citizens find them unsatisfactory," and raised his voice, saying, "I don't know how long such lenient punishments will continue."

Reflecting such public dissatisfaction, in April, the Supreme Court Sentencing Commission analyzed sentences handed down between 2014 and 2018 for crimes involving the production and distribution of child and youth pornography under the Youth Protection Act. The average sentence was 2 years and 6 months (30.4 months) imprisonment, which is about half of the statutory minimum sentence of 5 years.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

On the other hand, there are opposing views. Despite the existence of institutions such as the police, prosecution, and courts that can punish criminals, some argue that an individual publicly disclosing personal information and effectively punishing others is problematic.

Park, a man in his 30s, criticized, "It is literally illegal. Why do they disclose personal information at will?" He continued, "Isn't punishing through the judicial process what a rule-of-law country is about? Although Digital Prison may provide immediate satisfaction, it is clearly illegal."

Lee, a company employee in his 40s, said, "Innocent people are already suffering. Who will compensate for their lives?" and added, "Is this the operating principle of Digital Prison? The government should actively block the site."

Meanwhile, the Korea Communications Standards Commission (KCSC) has decided to block access to the site. On the 25th of last month, the KCSC stated, "While freedom of expression should be protected to the maximum extent, posting various personal information on Digital Prison can lead to double punishment or cause irreparable harm to innocent victims," and decided to block access to Digital Prison.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.