본문 바로가기
  • Home

A Study on the Issue Arising from the Use of Private Telecommunications Facilities beyond its Installation Purposes in Ubiquitous Cities

  • Public Land Law Review
  • Abbr : KPLLR
  • 2009, 43(2), pp.637-656
  • Publisher : Korean Public Land Law Association
  • Research Area : Social Science > Law

Wan-Q Pak 1

1숭실대학교

Accredited

ABSTRACT

Ubiquitous cities(“u-City”) are now being constructed and will be constructed in over 50 cities including but not limited to Busan, Dongtan, Paju, Kwangkyo, and Heungduck. The lack of law directly concerning the construction of u-cities caused many problems such as difficulties in obtaining necessary permits, inconsistent technological standards, and confusion as to the concept of u-City, etc. In order to resolve these problems, ‘Ubiquitous City Construction Act’ (“UCCA”) was enacted last March 28th and became effective as of September 29th. Connectivity, integration, and interchangibility are the functional traits of u-City and such traits needs to be realized amongst different information types, technologies, and administrative entities through information network. Under the Telecommunications Framework Act(“TFA”), information network is classified according to its installation purposes either as private telecommunications facilities (“PTFs” hereafter) or business telecommunications facilities(“BTFs” hereafter). Particularly Article 21 of TFA strictly restricts PTFs to be used only as their installation purposes prescribe unless “a special provision in other statutes” provides otherwise. In order to accomplish u-City's functional traits, it may be necessary to use PTFs beyond their installation purposes. The question is whether the UCCA provides for “a special provision in other statutes” within the meaning of Article 21 of TFA. It is not so. UCCA does not provide any provisions for PTFs at all let alone it does not provide for a “special provision” within the meaning of Article 21 of the TFA. Therefore, UCCA may not be interpreted as abolishing the restriction on PTFs under Article 21 of TFA. The Ministry of Land and See attempted to lift the restriction on PTAs. The proposed presidential decree by the agency contained a controversial provision that included PTAs as one of telecommunications network provided for under UCCA. If PTAs are to be used to accomplish u-city's functional traits without restriction, it may frustrate Article 21 of TFA. However, this controversial provision was modified later by inserting ‘ubiquitous sensor network’ instead of PTFs. Another attempt to lift restrictions are being made in the parliament. Some parliamentary members has proposed to amend UCCA so that administrative agencies and public institutes may interconnect with each other through PTFs. I suggest there be ample and serious discussion and consensus amongst interested parties including citizens, relevant industry leaders, policy makers, and scholars concerning the PTFs policy before such amendment is made. Considering the magnitude of u-Cities nationwide, the impact that such deregulation will bring to society as a whole as well as telecommunications industry is too great to think lightly. The policy regulating PTFs has not been made in a few days, and abolishment of it also should not be.

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2022 are currently being built.