This briefing comes from Korea View, a weekly newsletter published by the Korea Economic Institute. Korea View aims to cover developments that reveal trends on the Korean Peninsula but receive little attention in the United States. If you would like to sign up, please find the online form here.

What Happened

• The South Korean government is considering new ways to enhance coronavirus-related privacy protections following increasing public concern over excessive data disclosures.
• This includes measures to remove phone numbers from handwritten visitor logs and an investigation into the functions of thermal imaging cameras with facial recognition.
• In the meantime, as COVID-19 infection clusters continue to grow sporadically, health authorities caution the possibility of another mass outbreak.

Implications: Even as the government continues to prioritize public health amid the ongoing pandemic, its efforts to also protect personal information show that Seoul is attuned to concerns around civil liberties. Despite frequent critiques (particularly from abroad) of its stringent digital surveillance, South Korea demonstrates a willingness to address public opinion and adapt its privacy protection guidelines around contract tracing. Underpinning the decision to revise these rules is the belief among officials that public trust and cooperation are vital for containing COVID-19. As such, policymakers recognize that successfully managing the health crisis is in part contingent upon ensuring a certain degree of personal privacy.

Context: This past summer, South Korea mandated businesses to collect customer information, including names and phone numbers, as part of its effort to prevent the spread of the coronavirus. High-risk facilities like restaurants, cafes, and theaters require visitors to submit either a QRcode based entry log or a handwritten form. Many people have started questioning the effectiveness of the latter and whether it may lead to unauthorized leaks of personal information.

Korea View was edited by Yong Kwon with the help of Sophie Joo, Sonia Kim, and Chris Lee.

Picture from flickr user Jens-Olaf Walter

This briefing comes from Korea View, a weekly newsletter published by the Korea Economic Institute. Korea View aims to cover developments that reveal trends on the Korean Peninsula but receive little attention in the United States. If you would like to sign up, please find the online form here.

What Happened

• On August 12, Samsung Fire & Marine Life Insurance became the first Samsung affiliate to finalize a collective bargaining agreement with its union.
• Last December, a court sent Samsung Electronics Board Chairman Lee Sang-hoon to prison and charged 25 others at the company with sabotaging union activities. Lee is widely considered to be Samsung Group’s second-in-command.
• A separate court ruling in October also ordered Samsung to present a plan ensuring the company would not break the law again.

Implications: The Korean government’s attitude towards union activism shapes domestic conglomerates’ openness to negotiations with their workforce. Under the pro-labor Moon Jae-in administration, Samsung is the latest company to signal its conformity with the government’s pro-labor posture by accepting collective bargaining. Many other companies permitted their workers to form new unions, including steelmaker POSCO and online search portal Naver.

Samsung may have been further motivated to accept unionization after the country’s courts demonstrated their willingness to levy harsh penalties on Samsung leaders. While the latest deal between Samsung Fire & Marine Life Insurance and its employees does not clearly guarantee negotiations on wages, the government’s persistent support for labor unions will likely lead to more explicit commitments from corporate leadership.

Context: Samsung has been behind the curve on unionization. Competitor LG Electronics has had a union since 1963, and Hyundai Motor employees have been unionized since 1987. In accordance with the October court ruling, an internal compliance commission recommended that Samsung Vice Chairman Lee Jae-yong end the firm’s no-union policy. Since then, workers at many Samsung affiliates established unions and began negotiating with management.

Korea View was edited by Yong Kwon with the help of James Constant, Sophie Joo, Sonia Kim, and Chris Lee.

Picture from flickr account of ETUC CES

This briefing comes from Korea View, a weekly newsletter published by the Korea Economic Institute. Korea View aims to cover developments that reveal trends on the Korean Peninsula but receive little attention in the United States. If you would like to sign up, please find the online form here.

What Happened

• K-pop singer and actress Sulli committed suicide after being subjected to prolonged online bullying.
• After the singer’s death, 7 out of 10 South Koreans supported the use of real names when making comments on websites and other online platforms.

Implications: The public’s demand for the abolition of anonymous online comments contradicts the Constitutional Court, which sees online platform’s enforcement of real names as a violation of free speech. Meanwhile, cases involving online rhetoric has also become a growing issue for the Ministry of Justice. Online defamation cases doubled between 2014 and 2018. These developments suggest that the government may push for measures that ensure greater individual accountability in online speech – but would need to take on a case that would overturn existing precedents.

Context: In 2007, the government introduced the real-name identification system for around 150 popular websites including news media. The following year, the ruling party tried to regulate the internet by punishing online slanders after Korean actress Choi Jin Sil committed suicide after being bullied online. However, the bill did not become law because many lawmakers were concerned that the government may infringe on people’s right to free speech. In 2018, the Constitutional Court backed this position and reiterated that anonymous online comments are protected under the South Korean constitution.

Korea View was edited by Yong Kwon with the help of Soojin Hwang, Hyoshin Kim, and Rachel Kirsch.

Picture from user Rob Fahey on flickr

This briefing comes from Korea View, a weekly newsletter published by the Korea Economic Institute. Korea View aims to cover developments that reveal trends on the Korean Peninsula but receive little attention in the United States. If you would like to sign up, please find the online form here.

What Happened

• Advanced DNA analysis technology helped identify a suspect in a three-decade-old serial murder case.
• Since the introduction of Act on Use and Protection of DNA Identification Information and the establishment of a national DNA identification information database in 2010, more than 5,000 cases of unsolved crimes were re-opened.
• Constitutional Court ruled that an individual has the right to reject DNA collection and gave the National Assembly until December 31, 2019 to revise the Act on Use and Protection of DNA Identification Information.

Implications: Despite growing recognition that DNA analysis is effective in criminal investigations, the Constitutional Court’s decision reflected a growing awareness of individual rights and privacy in South Korea. The Court’s ruling reflected the view that existing laws provide insufficient protections, including against forced collection of DNA samples from suspects. Detractors of the current law have also pointed out that law enforcement agents currently have the power to collect DNA samples from protesters, which could have an adverse impact on the freedom of speech.

As a result of the ruling, the National Assembly is required to revise the relevant law by the end of this year. If the legislature fails to accomplish this revision, the whole law will be nullified and prosecutors may not be able to use DNA evidence in court. While this could frustrate investigations into unsolved cases, the ruling affirms that South Korean society has become more aware of civil rights.

Context: The constitutionality of the Act on Use and Protection of DNA Identification Information was called into question as soon as the law was introduced in 2010. However, a series of appalling crimes garnered public attention and reduced support for legal action that would protect the rights of suspected criminals. In 2014, another constitutional petition regarding the DNA Act was unsuccessfully advanced to the Court. The successful ruling in favor of greater protection for individuals in 2018 is a testament to the tenacity of legal advocates and the robustness of civil society in South Korea.

Korea View was edited by Yong Kwon with the help of Soojin Hwang, Hyoshin Kim, and Rachel Kirsch.

Picture by d’n’c from Wikimedia Commons