Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Currently, in the case of intellectual property infringement crimes, crimes occur mainly in the online environment, and at this time, online data acts as an important factor to prove the facts about illegal acts. On the other hand, the punitive damage compensation system aims to prevent repeating of similar illegal acts by requiring the perpetrator to pay more than the actual amount of damage when the perpetrator compensates for the damage caused by the tort. In order for punitive damages to be established, the causal relationship between intentional and illegal acts must be distinguished. However, due to the nature of online data, it can be easily forged or falsified, making it difficult to prove the facts about illegality. Therefore, we suggested direct utilization of digital forensic results for intentionality judgment and related institutional reform measures, focusing on crimes using digital devices. So, we want to contribute to the objective judgment standard of the punitive damages system by expanding the scope of digital forensic utilization.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: