미국의 휴대전화에 대한 통신감청 및 위치정보 확인수사의 법제 및 최근 판례에 대한 비교법적 연구

Recently, the Supreme Court of the US had sentenced a series of meaningful decisions in connection with cell phone investigations. Riley v. California, the decision by the Supreme Court of the US ruled that police generally may not, without a warrant, search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual incident to arrest. The Court rejected, “any expansion of search-incident to-arrest because it implicates far greater individual privacy interests than the brief physical search generally involved in a search incident to arrest. In addition, Carpenter v. United States, the recently decision by the Supreme Court of the US ruled that gathering the cell phone’s historical cell site location information over a certain period of time, applys to violating the reasonable expectation of privacy and it is necessary to issue a warrant to respond to the search of Article 4 of the Constitution amendment because it intrudes into comprehensively individuals' privacy life. It can be said that such a ruling began with the characteristics of a cellular phone to be used with individual privacy. Checking a content of real-time conversation exchanged by cell phone, real-time mail transmission, real-time text message and finding a cell-site location information of cell phone holder are used for new investigation techniques. However, the collection of such information by investigative authorities will serve as a serious violation of the privacy rights of individuals. Although communication interception and location information investigation of cell phone may be different with the key areas of constitutional rights, the possibility that a serious infringement on an individual's privacy has occurred is high, so how to do this limiting is a very important issue. If the investigation authority is abused, the first step towards an individual's "monitoring and control society" by the nation may has come. In this article, I examined the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of the US and the federal Supreme Court rulings concerning communication interception and positional tracking investigation. Also, concerning such infringement of privacy by the investigation, I conducted comparative legal examination on how to proactively and ex post control and restrictions. As a result, the United States is moving toward strengthening warrant principles for latest location information tracking investigations of cell phones. Recently, Korea’s Constitutional Court made an unconstitutional decision on the provision about part of the wiretapping and tracking of location information in the Protection of Communications Secrets Act. Korea also acknowledges the need for stronger control of the latest investigation techniques. Therefore, I believe that the latest tendency in US legislation and precedents will be useful for future revisions to the PCSA.