The key feature of Korea's criminal sanctions since the mid-2000s is the
introduction and strengthening of new security measures mainly targeting sexual
violence criminals. A number of critical studies have been conducted on the
legitimacy and validity of the newly established security measures based on the
principle of rule of law and responsibility. However, little empirical research has
been done on its effectiveness. Since the new security measures are aimed at
protecting public safety from criminals with high risk of re-offending, it is
necessary to use empirical data to determine the effectiveness and seek future
reforms in the big framework of overall criminal sanctions.

This study was designed as a three-year mid to long-term task to assess the
effectiveness of security measures for sexual violence offenders. The effectiveness
of the four security measures, such as the registration and notification system,
electronic monitoring system, anti-inflammatory drug treatment system and
employment restriction system, is to be assessed for each year.

This study maintained the framework of the uation study conducted in 2012
– uation of the process of the implementation and outcome of the registration
and notification system, and the exploration of key research topics. This study
mainly dealt with the following research topics. Currently, the details of Korea's
registration and notification system were examined, and legal issues raised from
the implementation of the system in 2000 to the present were reviewed. The
registration and notification systems of the United States, the United Kingdom,
Australia and Canada were reviewed comparatively, focusing on five topics; 1)
information registration, 2) punishment for violations of registration obligations,
3) special regulations for juvenile sex offenders, 4) disclosure of registration
information, and 5) the registration exemption. Empirical studies of the
implementation and effectiveness of registration and notification systems in the
United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia were reviewed in four
separate topics: 1) Recognition and attitude of relevant interest groups on
registration and notification systems; 2) the process of operating registration and
notification systems (risk classification and grading system, characteristics of
persons who violate registration obligations, relationships with violations and
recidivism etc.); 3) effectiveness of registration and notification systems(general
deterrence effect, specific deterrence effect, effect on changes in the safety of
local residents and prevention and protection behavior); and finally 4) negative
collateral effects of registration and notification on the subjects and their families.
In this study, the following five research methods were used to deal with the
above research topics. 1) literature research, 2) analysis of official crime statistics
and related administrative data, 3) analysis of written judgments and related
secondary data on cases subject to registration, 4) focus group interview for the
police and probation officers who manage registered sex offenders and general
public, and finally 5) survey of police, the public and registered sex offenders.

Based on the empirical results, this study suggested the following system
improvement plans.
∙ Operate personal information registration and notification system
based on the risk of recidivism
Like other security measures for sexual violence criminals(attachment of
electronic devices or sexual impulse medication), the registration and notification
systems also require that a prosecutor requests registration or notification of a
sex offender, and then a relevant expert investigates the risk of re-offense of
the subject. And, based on the results, the court must finally decide whether
to register or disclose. The judge decides whether to register based on the result
of the risk assessment for recidivism, and divides the sex offenders whose
registration is decided into 3-4 grades according to the degree of recidivism risk.
In addition, for each of these grades, the registration period, the frequency of
confirming the authenticity of the submitted information, the minimum elapsed
period for application for registration exemption, whether to disclose, and the
method and period of disclosure must be differentiated.

∙ Unified management system of personal information registration
and notification system
In the following three aspects, it is appropriate to unify the management of
the registration and notification system to the Ministry of Justice. First, Only then
can management be more efficient. Second, since registration and notification
of personal information is one of the security measures, it must be managed
by the law enforcement department. Third, since the registration and notification
system is one of the strategies to prevent recidivism of sexual offenders in the
local community, this system must be implemented with an integrated perspective
in connection with other recidivism prevention strategies such as probation,
electronic supervision, sexual violence treatment program, and sexually
transmitted drug treatment after execution.

∙ Improvement of registration system
Reduction of registration period: It is necessary to shorten the registration
period in accordance with the invalidation period of the sentence, and to ease
the registration obligation and inspection level after the first 5 years without
a second offense. Addition of registration information for investigation purposes:
In order to ensure that registration information related to the criminal conviction
can be properly used for investigation, in addition to whether there is a sexual
offense conviction and the number of convictions, information such as the age
and sex of the victim, the place of occurrence, and the nature of the crime
method should be included in the criminal conviction-related registration
information. In addition, it is necessary to add internet identity identification
information(the site and ID to which the registered sex offender has subscribed,
the name on the SNS, the registered Internet provider, etc.) to the registration
information for the recently increasing online sex offender management.

Enhancing the use of registered information for investigation purposes: In the
event of a registration exemption decision, the registered sex offender is
exempted from the obligation to submit registration information when the
registration information is changed, and the procedure for periodically checking
the registration information by the police is stopped, but the registered personal
information is not destroyed. It is necessary to use it as investigation information.
In addition, it is necessary to increase the utilization of the personal information
registration system as investigative information by interlocking with other criminal
justice systems having different information.

Ensuring accuracy of registration information; When registered sex offenders
are subject to probation, the police can share information on the trend of
probation targets at the probation office, or the way the probation officer
manages registered sex offenders can be considered as one of the ways to
improve. In the latter case, when the security disposition period is over, the risk
of recidivism is considered to have extinguished, and it should be premised that
the security disposition period and the registration period are matched.
Enhancement of efforts to stipulate the subject's obligations and protect privacy
when checking the site: When the police visit the sex offender's home to check
whether the information registered by the sex offender is correct or if the
registration information has been changed, it is necessary to stipulate in the law
the obligations of the sex offender to comply. In addition, it is necessary to ensure
that the police in charge do not change as often as possible and to implement
systematic and consistent education for the police in charge to protect the privacy
of registered sex offenders.

A plan to improve the understanding of the registration system and obligations
of the person subject to registration; Courts that are obligated to notify must
move away from simply distributing notices. After making a checklist of essential
matters that registered sex offenders need to know, the relevant court officer
must meet in person with the registered sex offender, explain the main points
one by one, and obtain the signature of the person subject to registration for
each item. Considering the fact that most sex offenders are recently ordered to
complete the sexual violence treatment program, it is necessary for probation
offices to take mandatory responsibility for education on registration procedures
and registration obligations for persons subject to summary orders.

Improvement of handling method for violation of registration obligation; Since
a significant number of violations of registration obligations are caused by not
sufficiently notifying the fact that registered sex offenders are subject to
registration and that they are required to register, it is necessary to first notify
the subject of registration and change the education method. If the registration
obligation is violated, it is necessary to first warn or give guidance to the
registered sex offender. In addition, if sanctions for violations are necessary, less
invasive alternative measures such as imposing administrative order penalties
such as fines for negligence should be applied, and criminal penalties should
be applied when violations of registration obligations accumulate.

Improvement of the registration exemption system; If the current registration
exemption system changes from the claim exemption method to the ex officio
screening method, or if the current method is maintained, the Ministry of Justice
must notify the target person who meets the registration exemption requirements.

∙ Improvement of registration system
Abolition of the Internet Disclosure System: The public actively supported the
disclosing system for personal information of sex offenders, and it appears that
the experience of the disclosure system has a positive effect on the change in
self-efficacy and preventive behavior that it is likely to be able to cope well
in situations of sexual crime. Therefore, it is difficult to discuss the abolition
of the public system even if it has a side effect on sex offenders and their families,
and has no significant effect on deterring recidivism. Considering the purpose
of the public system to inform local residents that sex offenses are living nearby
so that residents can protect themselves, the low utilization rate of ‘Sex Offender
Notification e’, user complaints about the residence information of ‘Sex Offender
Notification e’, and that the Internet disclosure and postal notice are both
imposed when a disclosure order is issued, the Internet disclosure system is
appropriately abolished.

Use of different notification methods and media according to the risk of targets;
After classifying the risk level of the disclosure target, it is necessary to consider
the disclosure method using different media according to the risk level. In Western
Australia, registered sex offenders whose registration obligations have not been
properly met or whose location is unknown due to fleeing are disclosed on the
Internet, and high-risk sex offenders are disclosed through the website to local
residents only. Lastly, registered sex offenders who are not at high risk, when
the general public asks the police whether a specific person who regularly
contacts their child is a sex offender, the police will disclose it individually. There
is a need to benchmark such an open system.

Expansion of mail notification subject: It is necessary to amend the law to
expand the subject of receiving mail notification to single women or single female
households.