정보관리학회지 (Journal of the Korean Society for information Management)

  • 제38권2호
  • /
  • Pages.201-226
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1013-0799(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2586-2073(eISSN)
한국정보관리학회 (Korean Society for Information Management)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

전자기록의 증거적 가치 수립을 위한 기능요건에 관한 연구: 미국 eDiscovery 적용을 중심으로

A Study on Functional Requirements for the Establishment of Evidence Values of Electronic Records Focused on eDiscovery

  • 최기쁨 (전북대학교 일반대학원 기록관리학과) ;
  • 이젬마 (국가기록원, 숙명여자대학교 대학원 문헌정보학과) ;
  • 오효정 (전북대학교 문헌정보학과, 문화융복합아카아빙연구소)
  • 투고 : 2021.05.17
  • 심사 : 2021.06.15
  • 발행 : 2021.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

근래까지 증거개시의 대상은 본래 종이 문서로 제한되어 왔으나, 디지털 시대로의 전환에 발맞추어 증거개시의 대상도 확대됨에 따라 현 시점에서는 전자적으로 생성된 정보에 관한 쟁점을 해결하는 것이 소송에서 중요해졌다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 전자기록이 증거로서 인정받기 위한 각 영역의 요건을 분석하고 기록관리 관점에서 고려해야 하는 요소를 설명하였다. 특히, 증거로서 전자기록을 활용되기 위한 선진 사례로, 미국의 전자증거개시제도인 eDiscovery를 선정하여 전자적 정보가 어떻게 수집, 보존되어 최종적으로 법원에 제출되는지를 살펴보았다. 특히 증거 보존 조치 지침을 조사하여 기록이 증거로서 보존되기 위해 고려되어야 하는 요건이 무엇인지 파악하였으며, 증거력이 있는 전자기록을 제출할 수 있도록 도와주는 도구인 eDiscovery 솔루션의 기능을 분석하였다. 본 연구결과를 통해 전자증거개시를 지원하는 시스템 구현 시 실질적인 도움이 될 수 있는 필수 기능요건을 도출하였다.

Discovery's collection was originally paper documents, but with the advent of the digital age, its collection expanded. Resolving the issue of ESI has now become important in litigation. Therefore, this study analyzes the requirements of each domain for electronic records to be recognized as evidence. It also explained the factors that should be considered in record management. In addition, eDiscovery in the United States was selected as an advanced case to utilize records as evidence. This study investigated the Commentary on Legal Holdings: The Trigger & The Process and analyzed which functions must be considered in order for electronic records to be preserved as evidence. To this end, we analyze the functional requirements of the eDiscovery solution. Through this, necessary functional requirements are derived to help implement the system in preparation for eDiscovery.

키워드

과제정보

이 논문은 2021년도 전북대학교 연구기반 조성비 지원에 의하여 연구되었음. 이 논문은 2020년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임 (NRF-2019S1A5B8099507).

참고문헌

  1. Judicial Policy Research Institute (2017). Basic rearch on the status and improvement plans for examining evidence of electronically stored information. Goyang: Judicial Policy Research Institute.
  2. Kim, Do Hoon (2015). A study on the proportionality in electronic discovery in the U.S.A.. Hannam Journal of Law&Technology, 21(3), 3-44. https://doi.org/10.32430/ilst.2015.21.3.3
  3. Kim, Do Hoon (2020). A study on the sedona conference's commentary on legal holds. IT&LAW REVIEW, 0(20), 165-204. https://doi.org/10.37877/itnlaw.2020.02.20.5
  4. Kim, Il-a (2016). The Trends Analysis on the American Business Records Management Responding to E-Discovery. Master's thesis, Myongji University, Republic of Korea.
  5. Kim, Senbom (2015). An Analysis on E-Discovery System as Opportunities and Threats for Record Management. Master's thesis, Myongji University, Republic of Korea.
  6. Korean Institute of Criminology (2011). A Study on the Discovery of Electronically Stored Information(E-Discovery). Seoul: Korean Institute of Criminology.
  7. Kwon, Yangsub (2016). A study on the admissibility of digital evidence. Legal Theory & Practice Review, 4(1), 149-168.
  8. Lee, Gemma & Oh, Kyung-Mook (2020). A study on the judgment of authoritative records by applying the concept of authenticity and reliability. Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management, 20(3), 77-97. https://doi.org/10.14404/JKSARM.2020.20.3.077
  9. Lee, Gemma (2021a). Measures to improve requirements for securing the quality of reliable electronic records. Presentations at the Korea Society of Archival Studies, 59-75.
  10. Lee, Gemma (2021b). An analysis on the revision process and main contents of the international standard ISO 16175 sets. The Korean Journal of Archival Studies, 67, 5-55. https://doi.org/10.20923/kjas.2021.67.005
  11. Lee, Kwanhee & Kim, GI Bum (2018). Second thoughts on conditions for digital evidence admissibility, Journal of Digital Forensics, 12(1), 93-106. https://doi.org/10.22798/kdfs.2018.12.1.93
  12. Lee, Myoung Min (2019). Die forschung uber das selbstandige beweisverfahren in deutschland. Dong-A Law Review, 0(83), 243-268. https://doi.org/10.31839/DALR.2019.05.83.243
  13. National Archives of Korea (2011). Records and Archival Studies. Daejeon: National Archives of Korea.
  14. Park, Ji Won (2008). Historical analysis on the common-law discovery in the United States and England. Journal of Social Sciences, 14(1), 113-133.
  15. Park, Seoin & Kim, Jihyun (2020). A study on the analysis and improvement of public enterprises' record management for the utilization of record as legal evidence. Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management, 20(2), 41-65. https://doi.org/10.14404/JKSARM.2020.20.2.041
  16. Seol, Moon-won & Lee, Haein (2016). Business records and information management as preparation for e-discovery risks. Journal of Korean Society of Archives and Records Management, 16(4), 7-30. https://doi.org/10.14404/JKSARM.2016.16.4.007 The Criminal Procedure.
  17. Youn, Eunha (2019). A study on the concepts of record from a legal perspective. The Korean Journal of Archival Studies, 6, 89-121. https://doi.org/10.20923/kjas.2019.60.089
  18. Cohen, A. I. & Kalbaugh, G. E. (2010). ESI Handbook: Sources, Technology and Process. New York: Aspen Publishers.
  19. Cook, T. (2001). Archival science and postmodernism: new formulations for old concepts. Archival Science, 1, 3-24. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02435636
  20. Friedenthal, J., Kane, M. K., & Miller, A. R. (2005). Civil Procedure(Hornbooks). Minnesota: West Academic Publishing.
  21. Isaza, J. (2007). E-discovery compels: A seat for RIM at the counsel table. Information Management Journal, 41(1), 46-49.
  22. ISO 16175-1: 2020. Information and documentation - Processes and functional requirements for software for managing records - Part 1: Functional requirements and associated guidance for any applications that manage digital records.
  23. Jon, H. (2020. Aug 17). Sweden's Covid-19 strategist under fire over herd immunity emails. The Guardian. Available: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/17/swedens-covid-19-strategist-under-fire-over-herd-immunity-emails
  24. Millican, B. (2013). Building a successful E-discovery strategy. Information Management, 47(6), 32-34,36,47.
  25. Schuler, K., Peterson, C. P., & Vincze, E. (2008). E-discovery: Creating and Managing an Enterprise Wide Progra. Massachusetts: Syngress.
  26. The Sedona Conference (2018). The Sedona Principles: Best Practices, Recommendations & Principles for Addressing Electronic Document Production, The Sedona Conference Journal, 19(1), 1-214.
  27. The Sedona Conference (2019). The Sedona Conference Commentary on Legal Holds: The Trigger & The Process. The Sedona Conference Journal, 20, 342-414.
  28. EDRM. EDRM Model. 출처: https://edrm.net/
  29. Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Evidence. 출처: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre
  30. Legal Information Institute. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 출처: https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp
  31. Ministry of Justice. Practice Direction 31A - Disclosure And Inspection. 출처: https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part31/pd_part31a#2A.1