통신사실확인자료에 관한 비교법적 고찰 - 일본과의 비교를 중심으로 -

Concerns over infringe on privacy and confidentiality of communication are raised as it is possible to provide real time location information as well as real time monitoring with the development of ICT. The study of communication fact confirmation data is required, therefore. The comparison with Japan's Communication Interception Act is required because the requirements for interception under Japan's Communication Interception Act are stricter than those of Korea, even though Japan's overall legislations are similar to Korea. In addition, the facts that the Communication Interception Act stipulates participation of the person in charge when executing interception and that communication fact confirmation data is provided through seizure and search warrants under Japan's Criminal Procedure Act have great implications in improving Korea's Communications Privacy Protection Act. The Communications Privacy Protection Act should reflect these points and strict requirements for interception are needed in the future. Reducing the crime subject for interception is also required. It is necessary to stipulate the participation of the person in charge when executing interception and enhance procedural transparency by requiring the provision of communication fact confirmation data to be subject to seizure and search procedures under the Criminal Procedure Act. Comparing Japan’s Communication Interception Act would be possible to promote measures to improve legislation of communication fact confirmation data in Korea.