Seoul Court Orders Google Inc. To Disclose List Of Personal Information Of South Korean Users Reportedly Shared With Third Parties
Six South Korean activists have filed privacy suit against Google headquarters in the United States and Google Korea last year requesting the global tech giant to divulge whether the company had shared the personal information of its South Korean users with third parties.
The Citizens' Coalition for Economic Justice (CCEJ) reportedly suspects that the tech giant is sharing its users' personal information to a US intelligence agency called PRISM.
Six plaintiffs from CCEJ, Korean Progressive Network Center (Jinbonet) and South Korean chapter of Amnesty International filed the lawsuit with Seoul Central District Court to ask Google Inc. to clear the issue of personal data sharing activities.
"Even if Google has servers in the US or other countries, it must abide by South Korean law when dealing with users in South Korea," CCEJ said in a dispatch, as noted by Yonhap News Agency on July 23, 2014.
"Google should therefore respond to South Koreans' requests for information about its history of leaking sensitive data."
In February last year, Google Inc. reportedly violated South Korea's data protection law after failing to respond to the request of plaintiffs to disclose any records of personal information being hand over to third parties.
Meanwhile, a Seoul court on Friday reportedly ordered the global tech giant to release any records of personal information it has reportedly shared with its third parties.
KBS World reported on the same day that the Seoul Central District Court partially ruled in favor of the six plaintiffs from CCEJ, Jinbonet and Amnesty International who filed the privacy suit last year.
In addition, the court says Google Inc. should follow the South Korean law as long as it offers services to the people in South Korea.
Further reports have revealed that although the Seoul Central District Court has ordered the global tech giant to disclose certain information, the court has dismissed the plaintiffs' request for a 3-million-won compensation.
