일반적 인격권에 대한 헌법적 고찰 - 독일 연방헌법재판소 판례 고찰을 통한 일반적 인격권의 구체화 - = The Constitutional Consideration of General Personal Rights

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The specific content of the general personal rights stipulated in Article 2, Paragraph 1 of the German Fundamental Law is embodied in the precedents of the German Federal Constitutional Court. According to the German Federal Constitutional Court’s ruling, the rights to self-protection, self-portrait, and self-determination are derived from general personal rights. With the right to self-protection, the fundamental right to “guarantee the confidentiality and integrity of the information technology system” is derived, and the right to portrait rights and the rights to protection of honor are derived concerning the right to self-portrait. Furthermore, with respect to the right to self-determination, the rights to sexual self-determination and self-determination of personal information are derived.
In the German Federal Constitutional Court’s case concerning Princess Caroline, the private magazine restricted Princess Caroline’s personality rights because it was a case where the general personal rights of the petitioner for the constitutional complaint were restricted due to the article’s publication in the magazine. Here, when a private person (perpetrator) inflicts harm on the fundamental rights of another private person (victim), the state (protector) has the duty to protect the fundamental rights of the private person (victim). In this case, it was necessary to examine whether the state had taken appropriate and effective protective measures to protect the fundamental rights of the private person who was victimized under the Excessive Prohibit Principle. The German Federal Constitutional Court has created a new fundamental right to “guarantee the confidentiality and integrity of information technology systems,” or the “fundamental rights to computers” in its online search ruling. Among general personal rights, this precedent is related to the “right to self-protection.” Concerning the Honecker decision, considering the function of broadcasting as a medium to form public opinion guaranteed by the Constitution, a sentence between the general personal rights and freedoms of broadcasting is necessary. Even well-known public figures as historical figures in modern history have the right to be personality protected by the Constitution when broadcasting. Reporting through the media (broadcasting) about public figures’ trials is a fact of public and social nature closely related to the formation of public opinion, and since it is a matter belonging to the public sector, it is appropriate to report it through the media.
The Constitutional Court of Korea derives the general personal rights from the “dignity of humans” in the first sentence of Article 10 of the Constitution. The Constitutional Court of Korea has ruled that the general personal rights’ limitations are an individual’s right to self-determination, a violation of social evaluation, portrait rights, and a feeling of humiliation or shame.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 손인혁, "헌법재판에서 가처분의 허용성과 그 요건에 관한 관견(管見)" 연세법학회 (35) : 81-108, 2020

2 김일환, "한국 헌법상 “일반적 인격권” 존재 여부에 관한 비판적 고찰" 28 (28): 113-130, 2000

3 조소영, "지능정보사회에서 인격권의 새로운 보호체계 검토" 한국비교공법학회 21 (21): 109-129, 2020

4 표명환, "입법자의 기본권보호의무와 헌법적 통제" 한국헌법학회 11 (11): 211-241, 2005

5 이부하, "일반적 인격권의 헌법적 보장 - 독일의 헌법이론을 중심으로 -" 한국비교공법학회 17 (17): 137-157, 2016

6 이수종, "일반적 인격권으로서 음성권에 관한 비교법적 연구" (사)한국언론법학회 15 (15): 163-197, 2016

7 박진완, "우리 헌법상의 일반적 인격권의 보장체계" 한국공법학회 33 (33): 299-328, 2004

8 이부하, "생명에 대한 기본권보호의무와 과소보호금지원칙" 법학연구소 (62) : 1-21, 2014

9 김태오, "사이버안전의 공법적 기초 - 독일의 IT 기본권과 사이버안전법을 중심으로 -" 행정법이론실무학회 (45) : 105-134, 2016

10 이부하, "비례성원칙과 과소보호금지원칙" 한국헌법학회 13 (13): 273-300, 2007

11 이부하, "방송매체에서 인격권 침해에 대한 헌법적 보호- 독일 헌법이론을 고찰하며 -" 법학연구소 19 (19): 139-159, 2018

12 권형둔, "디지털 전환의 시대 언론의 자유 보장과 인격권 보호 사이의 균형모색 - 언론중재법 개정논의와 관련하여 -" 언론중재위원회 7 (7): 1-53, 2021

13 표명화, "기본권보호의무의 이론적 기초" 한국헌법학회 8 (8): 132-160, 2002

14 이부하, "국가의 기본권보호의무와 과소보호금지원칙" 법학연구소 17 (17): 39-64, 2014

15 정혜영, "과소보호금지원칙에 관한 소고" 비교법학연구소 38 : 631-668, 2013

16 이부하, "공인(公人)의 인격권과 표현의 자유" 서울시립대학교 법학연구소 20 (20): 43-77, 2012

17 Kutscha, Martin, "Verdeckte „Online-Durchsuchung"und Unverletzlichkeit der Wohnung" 2007 : 1169-1172, 2007

18 Gündisch, Jürgen, "Rundfunkberichterstattung aus Gerichtsverhandlungen" 1999 : 241-248, 1999

19 Ruffert, Matthias, "Privatrechtswirkung der Grundrechte-Von Lüth zum Stadionverbot – und darüber hinaus" 2020 : 1-6, 2020

20 Kutscha, Martin, "Mehr Schutz von Computerdaten durch ein neues Grundrecht?" 2008 : 1042-1044, 2008

21 Eifert, Martin, "Informationelle Selbstbestimmung im Internet-Das BVerfG und die Online-Durchsuchungen" 2008 : 521-523, 2008

22 최우정, "EU에서의 정보보호와 관련한 판례의 동향 -구글과 관련된 판례를 중심으로-" 중앙법학회 17 (17): 83-110, 2015

23 Hofmann, Manfred, "Die Online-Durchsuchung? staatliches Hacken oder zulässige Ermittlungsmaßnahme" 121-125, 2005

24 Wilms, Jan, "Die Anwendbarkeit des Rechts auf informationelle Selbstbestimmung auf juristische Personen i. S. von Art. 19 III GG" 2004 : 577-580, 2004

25 Pabst, Heinz-Joachim, "Der postmortale Persönlichkeitsschutz in der neueren Rechtsprechung des BVerfG" 2002 : 999-1004, 2002

26 Hoffmann-Riem, Wolfgang, "Der grundrechtliche Schutz der Vertraulichkeit und Integrität eigengenutzter informtionstechnischer Systeme" 2008 : 1009-1022, 2008

27 Dürr, Maximilian, "Der Schutz des allgemeinen Persönlichkeitsrechts nach dem Urteil zum Bundeskriminalamtsgesetz-wie viel Sicherheit ist zum Wohle der Freiheit notwendig?" 2019 : 432-440, 2019

28 Sachs, Michael, "Das neue Grundrecht auf Gewährleistung der Vertraulichkeit und Integrität informationstechnischer Systeme" 2008 : 481-486, 2008

29 Martini, Mario, "Das allgemeine Persönlichkeitsrecht im Spiegel der jüngeren Rechtsprechung des Bundesverfassungsgerichts" 2009 : 839-845, 2009

30 Roßnagel, Alexander, "Das Grundrecht auf Gewährleistung der Vertraulichkeit und Integrität informationstechnischer Systeme und sein Einfluss auf das Privatrecht" 2008 : 3534-3538, 2008

31 Lehr, Gernot, "Bildberichterstattung der Medien über Strafverfahren" 2001 : 63-67, 2001