원격지 압수수색과 전자정보 압수·수색 독립론- 대법원 2017.11.29. 선고 2017도9747 판결 -

Abstract

I use Daum email. I keep the email I wrote and sent in the mailbox. I read the received email and keep it in the mailbox. Whose email is this Daum email? Is it Daum company's or mine? Is this Daum email an Internet service provider who manages servers such as information storage devices? Isn't this Daum email mine, an Internet service user? The Internet service provider is a warehouse business and the Internet service user is the owner of the goods..... The commentary on this case begins here. For the first time, the Supreme Court recognizes remote seizure and search in this case. On its logical premise, electronic information is recognized as an independent object of seizure separate from the information storage medium. In this article, I would like to review whether electronic information can be seized independently regardless of the seizure of information storage media and how to define electronic information as an independent object of seizure and search. I would like to review the legal theory of remote out-of-area seizure and search, and in particular, whether it violates the sovereignty of other countries. The theory that manageable electronic information is regarded as a seized item, and that the seizure and search of electronic information is recognized regardless of the seizure and search of storage media is called the electronic information seizure and search independence theory. In this article, rather than creating an independent legal system and special law for the seizure and search of electronic information, I would like to review the method of adding or amending special regulations to the existing seizure and search regulations of the Criminal Procedure Act in consideration of the characteristics of electronic information.