Teacher who leaked sensitive information... “If there is negligence, damages must be compensated”

Meeting minutes containing sensitive information are registered in the system without setting ‘employee viewing restrictions’… neglected for 2 years
The 2nd trial court said, “I was just found not guilty because there was no intention… I was negligent in not setting a viewing limit.”

A teacher who was indicted and acquitted on charges of leaking a colleague's sensitive personal information lost a related damages lawsuit. The court ruled that even if criminal punishment was avoided because intentionality was not recognized, damages should be compensated to the injured party if there was negligence in the leak.

On the 29th of last month, the 1st Civil Division of the Busan District Court overturned the original trial ruling and ruled in favor of the plaintiff in the appeal trial for damages paid by A, a teacher in his 50s, against a school corporation and teacher B.

Mr. A had a meeting with the school in 2019 for the purpose of protecting school rights. The minutes of the meeting were completed based on the interview at the time, and the minutes contained sensitive personal information about Mr. A.

The problem began when Mr. B, who was the head teacher at the time, uploaded this to the Education Administration Information System (NEIS) without setting a ‘restriction on employee viewing’. This is because other faculty members can now freely view the meeting minutes containing Mr. A’s personal information. It was found that this state of full disclosure was maintained for two years.

Accordingly, Mr. A filed a claim for mental damages against Mr. B and the school corporation on the grounds that his sensitive information was leaked to a third party.

On the other hand, Mr. B's side refuted that he was not aware of the viewing limit setting function and had no intention of spreading Mr. A's information. He also emphasized that the information was already known to other faculty members and that NEIS was discontinued in December 2019, so the meeting minutes were not leaked.

The first trial court ruled in Mr. B’s favor. The court said, “Mr. B recorded the meeting minutes in accordance with the regulations and registered them in the system, but it appears that he was not aware of the viewing restriction function and registered them with the default setting of ‘do not set’,” and added, “It is difficult to acknowledge the illegality of this in light of the fact that Mr. B was indicted on charges of violating the Personal Information Protection Act and was found not guilty.”

However, the judgment of the second trial court was different. The appellate court overturned the original trial ruling, saying, “Mr. B knew that the meeting minutes were a matter that should be kept private, so he should have checked the ‘employee viewing restrictions’ section and set it so that employees could not view them. The defendant’s acquittal was not recognized as intentional, so he was not subject to criminal punishment, and his negligence in not setting employee viewing restrictions was acknowledged, so he is responsible for compensating the plaintiff for damages.”

Attorney Jeong Woo-young of Daeryun Law Firm, who represented Mr. A, explained, “Under the Personal Information Protection Act, ‘leakage’ refers to any act of revealing personal information to an unknown person, and if there is negligence for damages, liability cannot be avoided.” He added, “We were able to overturn the lower court ruling by emphasizing that not all teachers were aware of Mr. A’s sensitive information and that Mr. B’s actions amounted to a violation of the duty of care at work.”
 

Reporter Kim Jong-cheol (jckim99@sportsseoul.com)

[View full article]
Teacher who leaked sensitive information... “If there is negligence, damages must be compensated” (Shortcut)