• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.21
• /
• pp.177-199
• /
• 2009

In this study, I would try to observe the scopes and related matters of the authority of private security personnel based on the basic discussion about the identity of private security. Everybody knows, the problems of private personnel have been mainly discussed in the relations of the public police. Because the roles of private personnel are similar to the police, and in the perspective of the law, private security are regulated by the police. When we compared with the police, the scopes of authorities of private personnel are considered in several points. First, most private personnel are just only 'citizen', so they can exercise the authority as citizen. It can include self-defense, self-help. flagrante delicto arrest. But when discuss the authority in the scopes of a possessionary right or managemental right, the authority of private personnel can be extended somewhat. Moreover, when private personnel are delegated by the special laws, their authority are extended much more. Finally, when the whole authority are delegated by such as the privatization, private personnel authority can be nearly same to the police. But, it can be considered that the degrees of the delegated authority are flexible. And the exercise of the authority must be performed in the limit that not infringe the individual freedom and rights. It seems to me that the degrees of fairness in use of authorities and it's a permitted limit are set forth a premise not only the legitimate base but also judicial judgement. Therefore, the attitudes of the courts related the exercise of authority are very important. And the growth of private security and the extension of authority followed are inevitably accompany the various problems of responsibility, so it must be considered about that in many perspectives.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.15 no.6_2
• /
• pp.19-28
• /
• 2015

Recently in the condition of increasing of cruel-hearted crime, it is limited to keep the community safe by only police force and expanding role of private security is required. But current private security law and relation law have many delimitations. So reinforcing of Private security capabilities is needed and several measures are required. Integration of private security law and private police guards is the foundation of rule introduced of specific rights of private guards. Also authority of the private security should be ruled in private security law to prepare the conditions of performed guard duties. In relation to this, questioning of a suspicious person by a patrolman should be granted to the private security. Strengthening authority of private security can be helpful in preventing crime and policing.

• Journal of the Society of Disaster Information
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.70-83
• /
• 2008

The basic legislations regulating the private security in Korea are Private Security Business Act and Private Policeman Act. But this dualistic system of private security causes difficulties in unity and efficiency of private security operation and makes it complicated to supervise each personnel with effect. Besides despite similar service and duty, there is all the difference between private security guard and private policeman in regard of social position, pay, authority, and so on. Therefore it is suggested that the two Acts should be unified and the united private security act should be enacted. Legislating new private security act will lead to considering the detail legislative definition on qualification of personnels and business range.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.30
• /
• pp.85-115
• /
• 2012

The private security industry has expanded in proportion to economic developments throughout the world, largely because the existing security services provided by the government do not satisfy demands of various economic entities and people in the society for better security service. Therefore, it would not be unfair to say that security services by private sectors are decided by its quality, price, and customers' needs. A refined management system, however, is essential to assess qualification of security companies and their service quality, given the nature of public goods of security service. Despite the steady growth of private security industry in Korea, however, it has been continuously criticized that its security management system for better qualification of security guards, training, and private security companies have not been fully updated enough to guarantee good quality. This paper aims to gain insights to effective policy formation in the Korean private security industry, through reviewing the licensing system of private security guards and the Approved Contractor Scheme (hereinafter the ACS) in the UK- that has on one hand systematically regulated private security industry, but on other hand has enforced public-private cooperation by laying significant stress on autonomy of private security companies. The distinctive characteristic of the UK policy for the private security is that the Security Industry Authority (hereinafter the SIA), an independent authority, is leading development of the private security industry of the UK through specialized private security regulation and enhanced service quality. In addition, the UK is developing quality of security service with transparent financial management and recruitment of good quality security guards by adopting not only substantially specified regulations and standards, but the voluntary ACS system. Moreover, the SIA analyzes customers' demands for security service specializing the policy for private security through conducting a variety of surveys. With the analysis of the UK private security system, this paper suggests that the Korean government change from a non-specialized private security regulation system by the National Police Agency to an independently specialized private security authority like the SIA and adopt the compulsory licensing and the ACS system of the UK.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.6
• /
• pp.273-289
• /
• 2003

The purpose of this study is to explore the underlying causes of the development of private security in the United States. These include the increasing crime rates and fear of crime, the poor performance of public policing, the decentralization of political authority, the increase of mass private property, economic growth and increase of personal income, commodification of security, insurance companies' demand for tighter security and fear of litigation, and historical events such as World War I & II. Based on the findings of this study, it is suggested that no single factor would account for the growth of private security in the United States. In other words, the rapid growth of private security in the United States should be attributed to the interrelated influences of the factors given above. Finally, it might be the contribution of this study that the future development of private security in Korea would be guided by understanding the case of the United States because of the similarities of the developmental process in private security industry of two countries.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.33
• /
• pp.197-228
• /
• 2012

The private security industry in Korea has rapidly proliferated. While the industry has grown quickly, though, private security officers have recently been implicated in incidents involving violence, demonstrating an urgent need for systematic reform and regulation of private security practices in Korea. Due to its quasi-public service character, the industry also risks losing the public's favor if it is not quickly disciplined and brought under legitimate government regulation: the industry needs professional standards for conduct and qualification for employment of security officers. This paper shares insights for the reform of the Korean private security industry through a study of the licensing and training requirements for private security businesses in the United States, mainly focusing on the Private Security Officer Employment Authorization Act (hereinafter the PSOEAA) and the California system. According to the PSOEAA, aspiring security officers shall submit to a criminal background check (a check of the applicants' criminal records). Applicants' criminal records should include not only felony convictions but also any other moral turpitude offenses (involving dishonesty, false statement, and information on pending cases). The PSOEAA also allows businesses to do background checks of their employees every twelve months, enabling the employers to make sure that their employees remain qualified for their security jobs during their employment. It also must be mentioned that the state of California, for effective management of its private security sector, has established a professional government authority, the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services, a tacit recognition that the private security industry needs to be thoroughly, professionally, and actively managed by a professional government authority. The American system provides a workable model for the Korean private security industry. First, this paper argues that the Korean private security industry should implement a more strict criminal background check system similar to that required by the PSOEAA. Second, it recommends that an independent professional government authority be established to oversee and enforce regulation of Korea's private security industry. Finally, this article suggests that education and training course be implemented to provide both diverse training as well as specialization and phasing.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.26
• /
• pp.59-87
• /
• 2011

Security Business Act of Korea is leaning toward the aspect of regulation, while it provides few provisions about vesting the authority, which causes problems such as legal loopholes to be raised in regard to the rules about authorizing the private security personnel to perform security affairs properly and defining the limit of power. So, it should be done to interpret the law in order to draw the legal basis of empowering as well as to set limits of the authority of security main agent, and Article 7, Section 1, of Security Business Act is the very provision that involves the legal basis. In the scope of 'Management Power', the statutory authority in the first clause of Article 7 of Security Business Act, the security personnel can use force for self-defense, defense of others and property, and prevention of crimes. In addition, the powers of interrogation, access control, and eviction notice are involved in its scope. The private security personnel as the occupation assistant can take precautions and if the infringement on the benefit and protection of the law is imminent or done, he or she can use force within the limits of the passive resistance and the means of defiance on the basis of 'Management Power'. The private security personnel, however, can exercise the force only if the necessary conditions of legal defense, emergency evacuation, and legitimate act of criminal law are fulfilled.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.14 no.9
• /
• pp.227-235
• /
• 2014

The private security has achieved a rapid growth by playing an important role in supporting the public security. However, there are some negative results of this rapid growth. Violence committed by the private security is the biggest problem among them. This study discuss the necessity of eradicating violence committed by the private security, present some violence cases, and find solutions to the problem resulting from the cases. If violence committed by the private security is not eradicated, advancement in the private security service industry can not be expected. This study suggests the three possible solutions: reinforcing regulations restricting violence committed by the private security; strenthening the responsibility of the private security company (employer) for supervision and management on the private security guard (employee); establishing the philosophical identity of security service.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.15 no.6_2
• /
• pp.65-78
• /
• 2015

This paper aims to draw practical measures for the Protection of the Rights of the private security guards. The results of the analysis, and presents the legal definition if need be introduced for the protection of private security guards right, are as follows. First, it must be established in Private Security Act the basic provisions that assure the economic status of the private security guards. Secondly, there is a need to clearly define the scope of authority of private security guards. Third, there is a need to clarify the scope of physical force or power in the regulations relating to the duty of the private security guards. This provision during the "displayed its power", there is a possibility that is too arbitrary interpretation, it must be deleted. Fourth, it must be established by weighting penalties for assault of a private security guards. Finally, Private Security Act and the Petition Police Act has a difference in personality and the purpose of the enactment. So it is not desirable to be directly applied to private security guards the provisions that apply to the petition police.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.3
• /
• pp.251-272
• /
• 2000

Attempts have also been made to locate security in the so-called 'policingdivision of labour' In order to understand this, it is necessary to identify some of the links which exist between public police organizations and the private security sector. Such links can be divided into six types : 1) Interpersonal links, 2) Joint operations, 3) Exchange of services, 4) Granting of special powers, 5) Public bodies hiring private personnel, 6) New organizational. Van Reenen provides a useful outline of the different dimensions of future Glibalization of policing. Developments, he suggests, are likely to proceed in four directions : 1) Co-operation : at this level, the nature and powers of national police systems are not required to change, co-operation occurring between self-standing forces. 2) Horizontal integration : this arises when officers obtain authority to operate in another country, or where government officials from one country get authority over the police in another country. 3) Vertical integration : this exists when a police organization is created which can operate within the area of the EC as a whole. 4) Competition : the internationalization of policing in Europe presents itself, more and more, as a market in which different policing systems trade their products.