• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.35 no.1
• /
• pp.3-32
• /
• 2020

With controlling Drones, although it was discussed in the previous study which showed a possibility. Which is personality and property rights of third parties could be violated while operating the drone with a video camera. But It's hard to find out precedents related to drones in Korea. In case of that someone try to control the drone which is equipped with a camera in a yard of neighborhood, the German District Court (Potsdam) considered an operator of drone has little bit of careless to do his duty and admit nonfeasance claim in the owner of the one's property for prevention to repetition of similar situation according to a nonfeasance claim for prevention to Section 1004 (1) sentence 2 of the German Civil Code(BGB). The drone which is equipped with a camera have possibilities to disrupt property and personal rights of the owner. Because a danger in repetition is getting larger regarding the violation of law. Moreover, there is a case that someone shot down the drone which is equipped with a camer. Because it has a risk to interrupt private life and cause some dangerous in our life. The German district court(Riesa) recently have considered that controlling the drone with a camera in private spaces is illegal as a violation of personal life. In addtion to, the action of property owner shot down drone is a legal according to § 228 of the German Civil Code(BGB) which is caleed "Necessity". Although it is difficult to apply to foreign cases directly to Korea, similar cases are likely to be occurred in Korea. The decision of the German District Court showed implications to Korea. As demand for the camera-equipped drone increases in Korea, it is time to discuss specific measures for drone violations.