수용자 서신 무봉함과 개봉의 (헌)법적 검토 - 헌법재판소 세 가지 결정의 비교 판례평석 -

In 2008, it was completely revised to the Act on the Execution and Treatment of Prisoners. And it was declared that censorship of correspondence was prohibited in principle. Since censorship itself has a strong unconstitutional element, the prohibition of censorship has been taken for granted even if it is a letter from an prisoner. Therefore, the censorship of inmate correspondence is not a problem, but unsealing or opening the correspondence is controversial, and there are many decisions of the Constitutional Court. When an inmate’s outgoing mail is sent, the unsealed mail is presented to correctional officers to check contraband items. There is a decision of the C.C. that such measures infringe on the privacy of correspondence of inmates. On the other hand, inmates’ incoming mails are received after opening them to check contraband items, and C.C. said that was not illegal. The author will compare the decisions of the C.C. regarding unsealing or opening the correspondence, try to think about the balanced view between the public interest of maintaining order of correctional facilities and the private interest of guaranteeing the human rights of prisoners. Finally I want to present alternative opinions which are about the need of amending related acts or regulations because of the strong probability that unsealing or opening the correspondence infringes on the right to counsel.