A Critical Review of Whistleblowing in Korea

Purpose: In modern society, it is difficult to discover from the outside corruption that occurs secretly within an organization. Therefore, the purpose of the public interest reporting system is to contribute to the stability of people's lives and the establishment of a transparent and clean social climate by protecting and supporting people who report acts that infringe upon public interest. The Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission Act establishes the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission to process grievances and improve related unreasonable administrative systems, prevent the occurrence of corruption, and efficiently regulate corrupt activities to protect the basic rights and interests of citizens and ensure the adequacy of administration. The purpose is to contribute to the establishment of an honest public service and social climate. With the gradual development of a democratic society, citizen participation in the public sphere has expanded, and citizens have come to actively monitor and supervise the decision-making and exercise of authority in the public sector. And citizens' expectations regarding transparency in public institutions have further increased. The purpose of this study is to examine the contents of the Public Interest Whistleblower Protection Act and explore problems and ways to improve them. Method: Let's look at the meaning and purpose of the public interest reporting system. First, we review foreign whistleblower protection systems that have influenced domestic legislation. Second, we examine the main contents of the ‘Public Interest Reporter Protection Act’ and the ‘Act on the Prevention of Corruption and the Establishment and Operation of the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission(Corruption Prevention and Civil Rights Act)’, which are representative whistle-blower protection systems implemented in Korea, and review their problems and points of improvement. Through this, we aim to suggest improvement measures and legislative policies for public interest reporting. Results: The starting point of the discussion of the crime of trespassing lies in the interpretation of the interests of protection. The representative theories are the claim of ‘housing rights’ and ‘the theory of de facto serenity’, but precedents adopt the doctrine of the theory of de facto serenity. As for the degree of protection for the crime of trespassing, the crime of danger and the crime of infringement are opposed to each other. The interpretation of these precedents shows a lot of changes in the protection and interest of the crime of trespassing, the meaning of the infringement, the timing of the commencement of execution, and the timing of implementation. Conclusion: In every society, there are always those who harm the public interest, which is the interest of the entire society. These people exist not only in the private sector but also in the public sector, and their harmful acts to society are not easy to detect due to the secrecy and closedness of the organization and the specificity of their actions. For this reason, the existence of a public interest reporting system is meaningful. Therefore, in order for the public interest reporting system to be activated, the current law must be supplemented and enacted. In particular, it is necessary to make whistleblower protection and compensation systems a reality. In addition, Korea's public interest reporting system does not recognize reports made to media organizations, and this needs to be supplemented. Whistle-blowing is difficult due to its nature, but sufficient institutional protection measures must be provided for the public interest.