Neighbor installs surveillance camera to track and report him, gets three fines in 3 months, sues for invasion of privacy, loses lawsuit

The home improvement monitor caught the violation, and the neighbor got three fines in three months and went to court. Schematic diagram (data photo)

A Kaohsiung motorcycle rider surnamed Qiu was reported three times by his neighbors for "not using turn signals in accordance with regulations" in three months, and he received a total of 3,600 yuan in fines. Qiu Nu accused his neighbor of maliciously filming the incident due to a personal grudge, and sued the Kaohsiung City Traffic Adjudication Office to request that the punishment be revoked. After a trial, the Kaohsiung High Administrative Court determined that what was captured by the surveillance camera was an "open road" and did not fall within the scope of privacy, and ruled against the plaintiff.

The verdict pointed out that between February and April this year, the knight surnamed Qiu was continuously reported for violations while riding his bicycle through Dingqiang Street in Sanmin District. The traffic adjudication office issued three tickets worth 1,200 yuan each in accordance with the law. The knight was dissatisfied and filed an administrative lawsuit, claiming that his neighbor deliberately installed a surveillance camera to repeatedly record the comings and goings of him and his family, which not only violated the Personal Data Protection Act, but also seriously violated the right to privacy during the evidence collection process, and the penalty clearly violated the principle of proportionality.

The judge personally inspected the surveillance footage of the three violations and found that the angle of the camera was fixed, and the shooting range was the two-way asphalt road on Dingqiang Street, the exterior of the building opposite, and the curb. It was completely unable to see the private details inside the arcade or private residences.

The court found that the driver's driving behavior that was filmed took place in public spaces, and was an activity that could be heard by passers-by with their naked eyes. It did not belong to the private domain that should be protected by the right to privacy. Therefore, it was not illegal to report the video, and the police were justified in issuing fines based on this, and ruled to dismiss the lawsuit. Can be appealed.