KJCKorea
Journal Central

@article{ART001315062},
author={Park, In Soo and PARK MOONSEOK},
title={A Study on the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy - Focusing on Mandatory Seatbelt Requirement (15-2(B) KCCR 185, 2002Hun-Ma518, Octorber 30, 2003) -},
journal={Public Land Law Review},
issn={1226-251X},
year={2008},
volume={42},
pages={629-649}

TY - JOUR
AU - Park, In Soo
AU - PARK MOONSEOK
TI - A Study on the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy - Focusing on Mandatory Seatbelt Requirement (15-2(B) KCCR 185, 2002Hun-Ma518, Octorber 30, 2003) -
JO - Public Land Law Review
PY - 2008
VL - 42
IS - null
PB - Korean Public Land Law Association
SP - 629
EP - 649
SN - 1226-251X
AB - This paper is to the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy in Article 17 “The privacy of no citizen shall be infringed.” of Constitution of the Republic of Korea. The Reserch method is the analysis of Constitutional Court of Korean's decision on privacy invasion by mandatory seatbelt requirement in 2003. The background of case is the provision 48 of the Road Traffic Act obligates drivers of vehicles to wear seatbelts while driving and the provision 118 of the Road Traffic Act provides for a notification procedure for the payment of administrative fine for violations above provision 48. The complainant was cited by a police officer and notified to pay administrative fine in the amount of 30,000 won while driving without wearing a seatbelt. The complaint thereupon filed a constitutional complaint in this case on the ground that the provision 48 and 118 of the Road Traffic Act infringe upon the general freedom to act, the freedom of privacy, and the freedom of conscience of the complainant. The Constitutional Court, in a unanimous opinion, held that the provisions at issue in this case are not unconstitutional. (1) General freedom to act includes the freedom to conduct all actions and inactions and does not merely protect conduct that has value. Therefore, in the scope of its protection, a right to live in a rather dangerous way is also included, and the right not to wear seatbelts falls within the scope of protection of general freedom to act that sterms from the right to pursue happiness guraranteed in Article 10 of the Constitution. Mandating a seatbelt requirement is to protect the mutual interests of the social community by preventing and removing the danger and the hidrance to the life and bodily safety of citizens that may be caused by traffic accidents, by reducing the social cost incurred by the traffic accident and by maintaining traffic orders. Then, the provisions at issue in this case do not excessively infringe upon the compalinant's general freedom to act in violation of the principle of proportionality. (2) The road utilized for general traffic falls into the realm where the national and local governments are responsible for management threof, and such realm is interrelated to the legal interests of numerous other drivers and pederstrians or the community interests. Thus, the act of driving a vehicle thereon is no longer a conduct that occurs in a personal and intimate arena. Therefore, as the question of wearing a seatbelt behind the wheel while driving is no longer a question belong to the zone of privacy, the provisoin at issue in this case do not infringe upon and the freedom of proiavcy of the complainant. (3) Conscience that is protected by the Constituion is a strong and sincere voice of one's mind without acting according to which one's existential value of personality would collapse and is not a vague and absract concept. Therefore, wearing a seatbelt in order to avoid a sanction while driving does not belong to the area protected by the freedom of conscience This paper concentrates on the provision 48 and 118 of the Road Traffic Act infringe upon the freedom of privacy. As the standard of judgement on the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy, First, a conduct that occurs in a personal and intimate arena. Second, the basic conditions for privacy concerning overall personality and survival of such individual. Third, to the core area for self-determination or the essence of personality. Therefore, as the question of wearing a seatbelt behind the wheel while driving is no longer a question belonging to the zone of privacy, the above provisions of the Road Traffic Act at issue in this case do not infringe upon and the freedom of privacy of the complainant.
KW - 사생활(Privacy);사적영역(Private Realm);공적영역(Public Realm);사생활의 영역(zone of the Freedom of Privacy);사생활의 보호영역(Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy)
DO -
UR -
ER -

Park, In Soo and PARK MOONSEOK. (2008). A Study on the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy - Focusing on Mandatory Seatbelt Requirement (15-2(B) KCCR 185, 2002Hun-Ma518, Octorber 30, 2003) -. Public Land Law Review, 42, 629-649.

Park, In Soo and PARK MOONSEOK. 2008, "A Study on the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy - Focusing on Mandatory Seatbelt Requirement (15-2(B) KCCR 185, 2002Hun-Ma518, Octorber 30, 2003) -", Public Land Law Review, vol.42, pp.629-649.

Park, In Soo, PARK MOONSEOK "A Study on the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy - Focusing on Mandatory Seatbelt Requirement (15-2(B) KCCR 185, 2002Hun-Ma518, Octorber 30, 2003) -" Public Land Law Review 42 pp.629-649 (2008) : 629.

Park, In Soo, PARK MOONSEOK. A Study on the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy - Focusing on Mandatory Seatbelt Requirement (15-2(B) KCCR 185, 2002Hun-Ma518, Octorber 30, 2003) -. 2008; 42 629-649.

Park, In Soo and PARK MOONSEOK. "A Study on the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy - Focusing on Mandatory Seatbelt Requirement (15-2(B) KCCR 185, 2002Hun-Ma518, Octorber 30, 2003) -" Public Land Law Review 42(2008) : 629-649.

Park, In Soo; PARK MOONSEOK. A Study on the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy - Focusing on Mandatory Seatbelt Requirement (15-2(B) KCCR 185, 2002Hun-Ma518, Octorber 30, 2003) -. Public Land Law Review, 42, 629-649.

Park, In Soo; PARK MOONSEOK. A Study on the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy - Focusing on Mandatory Seatbelt Requirement (15-2(B) KCCR 185, 2002Hun-Ma518, Octorber 30, 2003) -. Public Land Law Review. 2008; 42 629-649.

Park, In Soo, PARK MOONSEOK. A Study on the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy - Focusing on Mandatory Seatbelt Requirement (15-2(B) KCCR 185, 2002Hun-Ma518, Octorber 30, 2003) -. 2008; 42 629-649.

Park, In Soo and PARK MOONSEOK. "A Study on the Zone of Protecting the Freedom of Privacy - Focusing on Mandatory Seatbelt Requirement (15-2(B) KCCR 185, 2002Hun-Ma518, Octorber 30, 2003) -" Public Land Law Review 42(2008) : 629-649.