• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.35-43
• /
• 2018

Currently, digital evidence takes judicial discretion in adopting it, which does not clarify the criteria for adoption, and it can shorten the analysis time of digital evidence with distributed processing techniques. However, due to the development of cryptographic techniques, there is a problem in that it is not suitable for the 48 hour limit of the warrant request. In this paper, we analyze the precedents for admissibility of evidence and the probative power in the civil/criminal proceedings, and discuss the need for objective and detailed adoption criteria to replace judicial discretion. In addition, we'd like to propose a preliminary application form for analysis of digital evidence as a problem for limit time for warrant claims from the perspective of forensics and a solution to the problem.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.133-139
• /
• 2017

Today, the activities of individuals and corporations are dependent not only on digital technology but also on the future of society, which is referred to as the fourth industrial revolution. Since the traces that arise from the crimes that occur in the digital society are also inevitably developed into a society that should be found in the digital, the judicial dependence of judging by the digital evidence is inevitably increased in the criminal procedure. On the other hand, considering the fact that many users are using virtual shared computing resources of service providers considering the fact that they are being converted into a cloud computing environment system, searching for evidence in cloud computing resources is not related to crime. The possibility of infringing on the basic rights of the criminal procedure is increased, so that the ability of evidence of digital data which can be used in the criminal procedure is limited. Therefore, considering these two aspects of digital evidence, this point should be fully taken into account in judging the evidence ability in the post-seizure warrant issuance and execution stage as well as the pre-emptive control. There is a view that dictionary control is useless, but it needs to be done with lenient control in order to materialize post-modern control through judging ability of evidence. In other words, more efforts are needed than ever before, including legislation to ensure proper criminal procedures in line with the digital age.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Computer Information Conference
• /
• 2020.07a
• /
• pp.187-188
• /
• 2020

형사소송법 제106조에서 '범위를 정하여 출력 또는 복제하는 방법이 불가능하거나 압수의 목적을 달성하기에 현저히 곤란하다고 인정되는 때에는 정보저장매체 등을 압수할 수 있다'의 규정과 제122조에서 '급속을 요하는 때'의 예외 규정을 근거로 스마트폰 압수·수색과정에서 범죄혐의와 관련성에 대한 구분 없이 정보가 무분별하게 탐색 복제되는 등 기본권을 침해하고 있으며, 영장주의 원칙에 반하는 위법한 집행이 되고 있는 실정이다. 이에 본 연구에서는 긴급압수 후 사후영장 발부 전에 별건의 범죄혐의를 확인하거나 증거로 활용한다면 위법한 압수에 해당할 수 있는 디지털증거 압수·수색 원칙의 문제, 디지털정보의 검색과 추출과정에서 참여권 보장의 문제, 스마트폰 정보에 대한 무결성 확보 등을 문제점으로 도출하였다. 이러한 문제점을 개선하기 위해 사전영장 없는 범죄사실과 관련성이 없는 정보의 탐색이나 추출 금지, 정보검색이나 추출과정에서 피압수자의 참여권 보장 및 디지털증거 분야 전문가로부터 조력을 받을 권리 보장, 무결성 확보를 위한 절차적·실체적 적법절차 준수 등 개선방안을 제시하였다.

• The Journal of Society for e-Business Studies
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.129-143
• /
• 2018

Recently, the use of digital media such as computers and smart devices has been rapidly increasing, The vast and diverse information contained in the warrant of the investigating agency also includes the one irrelevant to the crime. Therefore, when confiscating the information, the basic rights, defense rights and privacy invasion of the person to be seized have been the center of criticism. Although the investigation agency guarantees the right to participate, it does not have specific guidelines, so they are various by the contexts and environments. In this process, the abuse of the participation right is detrimental to the speed and integrity of the investigation, and there is a side effect that the digital evidence might be destroyed by remote initialization. In this study, we conducted surveys of digital evidence analysts across the country based on four domains and thirty measurement items for enabling environment for participation in information storage media export and digital evidence search process. The difference between the level of importance and the performance was analyzed by the IPA matrix based on process, location, people, and technology dimensions. Seven items belonging to "concentrate here" area are one process-related, three location-related, and three people-related items. This study is meaningful to be a basis for establishing the proper policies and strategies for ensuring participation right, as well as for minimizing the side effects.