Supreme Court: "Mobile Carriers Have No Obligation to Provide Customers with Base Station Addresses"

Court: "Base Station Location Is Not Personal Information... No Need to Provide Data"

The Supreme Court has ruled that mobile carriers are not obligated to disclose the address of the originating base station to subscribers.

The Supreme Court's First Division (Presiding Justice Kim Seon-su) announced on the 31st that it upheld the lower court's ruling, which dismissed the lawsuit filed by lawyer Kim Ga-yeon against KT seeking disclosure.

Kim, who was working as a full-time lawyer at the nonprofit organization Open Net, applied to KT in June 2016 to view detailed call and text records (including the called phone number, call date and time, frequency of use, and base station information). However, KT refused, citing that the requested information pertained to third parties or was not collected or held by KT.

In response, Kim filed a lawsuit against KT, arguing that the suit was filed for public interest purposes to examine how effectively the right to access personal information is guaranteed in South Korea, and demanded disclosure of detailed call and text records under the service contract.

The first trial court ruled that detailed call and text records were difficult to consider as personal information under the Information and Communications Network Act and did not accept Kim's disclosure request. However, it ruled that under the Information and Communications Network Act, users have the right to request their personal information held by service providers, and KT had an obligation to disclose Kim's detailed call and text records.

During the second trial, Kim narrowed the request to exclude other information and sought disclosure of the base station's lot number address or license number. The appellate court rejected Kim's disclosure request, stating that it was difficult to see that the mobile communication service contract between KT and Kim included an obligation to provide the base station's lot number address or license number.

The Supreme Court also ruled that KT has no obligation to provide the address of the base station connected when Kim's mobile phone made a call. The court stated, "Information about the location of the base station connected when Kim's mobile phone terminal made a call pertains to the location of the base station, not Kim's location," and added, "This information is difficult to consider as personal location information under the Location Information Act or personal information under the Information and Communications Network Act."

It further added, "It is also difficult to see that the mobile communication service contract includes an obligation for the defendant (KT) to provide the address of the base station location connected when the plaintiff's mobile phone made a call."