Case Summary

Court & Date:
Supreme Court (Criminal Division 2), September 25, 2025 – Case No. 2025Do4614

Defendants:
Four investigators from the National Intelligence Service (NIS)’s Gyeonggi Branch

Charge:
Violation of the Protection of Communications Secrets Act — secretly recording private conversations without court approval

Incident Background:

In July 2015, the NIS investigators enlisted an informant (“A”) as a paid intelligence source related to an underground revolutionary group.

After learning that upper-level members would gather at a campground in Seosan, the agents planted two hidden audio recorders disguised as fire extinguishers inside a camper van.

Their intent was to record A’s meeting (“evaluation ceremony”) with the group.

However, A did not join the conversation, and instead, four other individuals were privately recorded for about five hours.

Prosecutors viewed this as an unauthorized interception of private conversation and charged the investigators.


Key Legal Issue:
Whether the NIS officers had reckless or implied intent (미필적 고의) to record unrelated private talks.

Trial History:

1st Instance:

Found guilty; sentences ranged from 6–10 months’ imprisonment, suspended for one year.

Court held that they knowingly risked recording strangers’ private talks by installing indiscriminate devices.


Appeal Court:

Reversed and acquitted.

Found A’s testimony unreliable, noting that after being cut off as an informant, A demanded ₩1 billion (≈USD 1M) and threatened to expose the NIS.

Concluded there was no proof the officers intended to record non-participants and that the recording may have resulted from unexpected circumstances.

Held that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.


Supreme Court:

Upheld acquittal, ruling that the lower court’s decision respected the principles of free evaluation of evidence and reasonable inference, and no legal misinterpretation occurred.



Defense Counsel’s Comment:
Attorney Kim Jae-ok (Judicial Research & Training Institute 26th class) expressed gratitude that “the court corrected the facts” after six years of investigation and trial, calling it fortunate that the agents could return to their duties.

Article: https://www.lawtimes.co.kr/Case-curation/212530