개인정보보호법 제39조 제1항의 증명책임에 관한 짧은 고찰

The Personal Information Protection Act, which has a general legal status on personal information protection, stipulates the transition of the burden of proof for intentional ⦁ negligence, with provisions governing the liability for damages related to personal information in Article 39 (1). Recently, it has been questioned whether it is possible to change the burden of proof for intentional ⦁ negligence to the personal information controller to prove the ⦁ of claims for violations of the law, but the Supreme Court considered that the plaintiff, the information subject, is responsible for proving the ⦁ of claims for violations of the law. As a premise to examine the reduction of the victim's burden of proof from the liability for damages caused by violations of the Personal Information Protection Act, the significance of the burden of proof and the general principle of distribution of the burden of proof were first examined. The strict application of the theory of classification of legal requirements, which is a general principle of distribution of certification responsibilities, always leads to unreasonable results in modern lawsuits where evidence is ubiquitous, such as pollution litigation, so some discussions to supplement this have been confirmed. It is desirable to use the theory of classification of legal requirements as the standard for distribution, and in the case of modern litigation, it is desirable to draw specific valid conclusions through the conversion or relaxation of the certification responsibility by referring to discussions on new standards. In light of the fact that the transition of the burden of proof must be recognized extremely exceptionally unless there are special provisions in the law, the conclusion of the Supreme Court ruling is valid, judging that the plaintiff, the information subject, is responsible for proving violations of the law. However, since lawsuits for claims for damages due to infringement of personal information have similar characteristics to modern lawsuits, it is necessary to ease the burden of proof to protect the information subject who is the victim. Specifically, it is necessary to actively review measures to ease the burden of proof of causal relationships by utilizing case law in pollution litigation or medical malpractice litigation.