Supreme Court Rules Separate Investigations Using Reference Witness's Phone Forensics Are Illegal
Case Overturned and Remanded in Military Officer's Classified Information Leak
Procedural Issues in Separate Charges Discovered During Defense Security Command Investigation
"Extracting and Using Reference Witness's Mobile Data for Separate Offenses Is Unlawful"
The Supreme Court has ruled that it is illegal to use information from a seized mobile phone for a separate investigation if the content is outside the scope specified in the warrant.
The Supreme Court's Third Division, presided over by Justice Oh Seokjun, overturned the original verdict that sentenced Lieutenant Colonel A to eight months in prison with a one-year suspended sentence, and remanded the case to the Seoul High Court. Lieutenant Colonel A was put on trial for allegedly drafting a national defense plan containing classified information after his discharge between June and August 2018, and providing it to lawyers and prosecutors in connection with seeking employment at a major law firm.
This case began when the special investigation team for the Defense Security Command incident seized and analyzed Lieutenant Colonel A's mobile phone, who was a reference witness at the time. During the process of extracting and reviewing the entire contents of the phone's copy, investigators discovered suspicions of leaking military secrets. Subsequently, they obtained a new seizure warrant for the relevant storage device. The military courts at both the first and second instance found some of the charges guilty and sentenced him to eight months in prison with a one-year suspended sentence.
Hot Picks Today
Taking Annual Leave and Adding "Strike" to Profiles, "It Feels Like Samsung Has Collapsed"... Unsettled Internal Atmosphere
- There Is a Distinct Age When Physical Abilities Decline Rapidly... From What Age Do Strength and Endurance Drop?
- "One Comment Could Lead to a Report": 86% of Elementary Teachers Feel Anxious; Half Consider Resignation or Career Change
- "After Vowing to Become No. 1 Globally, Sudden Policy Brake Puts Companies’ Massive Investments at Risk"
- On Teacher's Day, a Student's Gifted Cake Had to Be Cut into 32 Pieces... Why?
However, the Supreme Court overturned the verdict on the grounds that the evidence collection process was unlawful, effectively acquitting the defendant. The Supreme Court stated, "The defendant was merely a reference witness unrelated to the suspicions that led to the issuance of the first warrant," and added, "In principle, the seizure and search of electronic information by investigative agencies should be limited to information related to the criminal suspicion that formed the basis for the warrant."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
