Memorial messages and flowers are placed for the victims of the Oct. 29 crowd crush tragedy in Itaewon, Nov. 10. Korea Times photo by Shim Hyun-chul

Police investigate 2 internet media outlets for alleged violation of Personal Information Protection Act

By Lee Yeon-woo

Two internet media outlets' disclosure of the names of 155 of the Itaewon tragedy victims without the consent of their family members has emerged as a diplomatic issue, as some foreign embassies have made complaints.

During the Oct. 29 crowd crush in Itaewon, Seoul, 26 foreign nationals from 15 foreign countries, including China, Russia, the United States, Japan and Australia, lost their lives.

Russian Ambassador to Korea Andrey Kulik revealed his discomfort with the disclosure of the victims' names.

"(The ambassador) has said that revealing the names of Itaewon tragedy victims without the consent of their family members was inappropriate," an official of the Russian Embassy in Seoul told The Korea Times when asked about the embassy's reaction to the disclosures.

The Chinese, Australian and Japanese embassies in Korea declined to comment on the issue.

Earlier in the week, an official from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs told reporters that an undisclosed embassy based in Seoul had complained about the release of the names and asked the online media outlets to run a correction acknowledging the violation of privacy of its country's citizen or citizens.

The official added that the families of 25 of the 26 foreign victims didn't want their names revealed while eight of them didn't even want their nationalities revealed.

Two internet media outlets ― Citizen Press Dandelion and Citizen Press The Investigation ― drew the ire of some of the bereaved families over their disclosure of the names of 155 of the at least 158 victims on Tuesday.

Criticizing the two media outlets for releasing the names of the victims without the consent of their family members, the grieving families fear the possibility of secondary harm.

Candles are lit to pay tribute to the victims of the Oct. 29 Itaewon crowd crush at Jeoldusan Martyrs' Shrine in Mapo District, Seoul, Nov. 10. Korea Times photo by Shim Hyun-chul

Police started investigating the two online media outlets on Wednesday, as Seoul Metropolitan Council member Lee Jong-bae of the People Power Party (PPP) and some civic groups filed separate complaints against them for violating the Personal Information Protection Act.

Under the law, disclosing others' personal information without prior consent is punishable and the discloser may be liable to financially compensate the victims.

The Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency said it has assigned the case to the anti-corruption and public crime investigation unit and promised to advance the investigation promptly. The team's investigation will be focused on how they received the list.

Earlier, some lawmakers from the ruling PPP said that the list may have been leaked from the Democratic Party of Korea (DPK), as some of its members had requested the government to disclose the victims' names before the two media outlets released the list.

"The police need to investigate how deep the connection between the organization that released the list and the DPK goes," Rep. Cho Eun-hee told National Police Agency Commissioner General Yoon Hee-keun during a plenary of the National Assembly.

Meanwhile, some DPK members defended the two media outlets. "To properly memorialize them, it is right to disclose (the names). We should persuade the families to disclose them, make a memorial place and let people know how they have lived and died," Rep. Lee Hae-sik from the DPK said.

Citizen Press Dandelion was not reachable for comment on Nov. 17.

Regarding the criticisms, Citizen Press Dandelion released a statement, Tuesday. "The government-led mourning process is insulting to the deceased," it said. "Proper grieving will begin when one is able to say the names of those who were lost."

In another statement on its website, Citizen Press Dandelion claimed it had checked the Personal Information Protection Act before the disclosure. "Despite the law, we chose to disclose their names because we wanted to fulfill the role of the media," the statement read.

Following the disclosure of the victims' names, the media outlets have drawn a barrage of criticism from politicians and family members of the victims. Some bereaved family members called on them to remove the names of their loved ones from the list.

As a result, 29 of the victims' names were removed from its website as of Nov. 17, in response to the requests.