Court rules recording verbal abuse between third parties in office is not illegal

Gettyimage

Is it illegal to record verbal abuse and profanity between third parties in the office that are openly conducted as if they were telling others to listen?

The courts have judged that "only the recording of the conversation in which you participated is legal." However, a recent court ruling stated that “if it is a conversation that everyone can hear, it is not illegal to record it even if you did not participate in it.”

According to the labor rights group Gapjil 119 on April 15, the Daegu District acquitted public sector employee Mr. A, an employee of a public agency who was accused of violating the Communications Secret Protection Act on the 2nd.

Mr. A had been going through a difficult time because his supervisor, Mr. B, frequently swore at him in the office. Mr. A collected evidence through recording to report Mr. B for workplace bullying.

In December 2021, Mr. A recorded B swearing at the director and head of the headquarters while talking to other employees in the office. Mr. A submitted the recording in January of the following year when he reported Mr. B for workplace bullying. However, the prosecution sought a one-year prison sentence for Mr. A, claiming that he violated the Communications Secrets Protection Act by recording a conversation in which he did not participate.

The first trial court said, "The Communications Secret Protection Act prevented us from recording conversations between others that were not disclosed. This means that a third party who did not participate in the conversation should not record it," adding, "Here, 'not disclosed' does not mean a secret, but means that it is not disclosed to the public, and the nature and size of the place should be comprehensively considered." The court said, "Based on the structure and size of the office and the height of the partition of Mr. A's seat, he seems to be able to fully hear what Mr. B talked about." All seven jurors in the trial, which was conducted as a public participation trial, also returned a verdict of not guilty.

The labor community interpreted the verdict as a sign that victims of workplace bullying, who have had difficulty securing physical evidence, will be able to gather evidence more actively.

※This article has undergone review by a professional translator after being translated by an AI translation tool.