
Teacher accused of violating the Stalking Crimes and Penalties Act, the Credit Information Use and Protection Act, and residential trespassing for requesting evidence of spouse's infidelity
■ Case Overview The client was sued by his spouse for stalking and violation of the Personal Information Protection Act after commissioning an external investigation to confirm his spouse's infidelity. The spouse claimed that the client had used a third party to locate him and invade his privacy, but the client had only commissioned the investigation to confirm the infidelity and had never ordered the location tracking or invasion of privacy. Faced with an unfair situation, the client sought legal assistance. ■ Case Issues The issues were whether the client's requested investigation was prohibited under the Credit Information Act, and whether the client's behavior constituted stalking and invasion of privacy. ■ On Kang's assistance 1. Clarification of the facts Based on the client's statement, it was determined that the client merely requested an investigation to confirm the fact of his spouse's infidelity, and did not track the location of a specific person or invade his privacy.