[Exclusive] 'Korean-style surveillance society?' 3.5 trillion won spent on 380,000 CCTVs... equivalent to the population of a small city

[Financial News] It has been revealed that local governments across the country have invested nearly 3.5 trillion won over the past six years to install more than 380,000 new closed-circuit (CC)TVs to prevent crime, fires, and traffic accidents. This is equivalent to the annual budget and population of a small city. However, as the number of CCTVs increases, privacy invasion controversies are also emerging, raising concerns about a potential 'surveillance society'.
On the 29th, according to the 'National Local Government CCTV Installation Budget and Complaint Status' obtained by Financial News from the Ministry of the Interior and Safety at the request of the office of Lee Gwang-hee, a member of the National Assembly's Public Administration and Security Committee, the cost of installing CCTVs from 2019 to 2024 was estimated at 1.4553 trillion won. This fund was used to deploy 384,152 new CCTVs.
In particular, last year, a budget of 282.43484 billion won was used to install 65,296 CCTVs nationwide. Most installations were for crime prevention and investigation (58,963 units). Facilities safety and fire prevention (2,725 units), traffic management (2,900 units), and others (708 units) were also included, but did not exceed 10,000 units.
However, as the number of CCTVs increases, privacy invasion controversies continue. While citizens acknowledge the primary necessity of CCTVs for crime prevention, they remain negative about installations in places that affect personal life or commercial areas.
In fact, out of the 10,873 complaints received last year regarding CCTV installations, 10,829 were related to the selection of locations affecting residents' privacy and commercial areas. Complaints include concerns about capturing private spaces like residential alleys, directly in front of windows, yards, and verandas, and that CCTVs installed near sensitive businesses like bars or karaoke rooms could deter customers. There were also 44 claims of direct privacy invasion. As a result, two CCTV installations were halted.
The reason CCTVs are not welcomed by residents is also due to different installation and operation ordinances or rules for each local government.
For example, a region in Gangnam, Seoul, strengthens public hearings or consent procedures when installing CCTVs, but some small cities frequently issue formal announcements and omit consent. It is also reported that some areas expand the shooting range to include residential areas or private spaces, not just limited to roads, parks, and other public places.
Experts explain that it is necessary to check whether the CCTV video storage period of 30 to 60 days, as stipulated by the Personal Information Protection Act, is being observed. Long-term storage is pointed out as a concern for information leakage.
Chang-moo Lee, a professor of urban engineering at Hanyang University, pointed out, "Safety and privacy often conflict, so it is essential to establish reasonable criteria to coordinate them," adding, "Based on cases in areas and places with severe conflicts, realistic and precise criteria for CCTV installation should be established."
Experts also advised that considering the potential for indiscriminate CCTV installation to substantially invade citizens' privacy, it is necessary to establish control measures and clear standards. They warned that if Korea focuses solely on expanding CCTVs without sufficiently establishing legal and institutional foundations, it could face similar concerns of excessive surveillance as seen in some countries.
Seok-jin Hwang, a professor at Dongguk University's Graduate School of International Information Security, criticized, "CCTVs are installed in places we do not want, and daily life is repeatedly recorded, but most are unilaterally notified without consent," adding, "There is virtually no guidance or consent on where, how, and for what information is stored, used, and disposed of."
He further pointed out, "The current system, which relies solely on local government ordinances, poses a high risk of complaints and misuse, so the scope of collected information and the status of storage and disposal should be transparently disclosed through separate laws and specific guidelines."


yesji@fnnews.com Kim Yeji Reporter