Authorities said Sunday that a police officer assigned to the Seoul Dongdaemun Police Station (서울 동대문경찰서) had been arrested on suspicion of possessing, creating and distributing sexually exploitative images. The officer, whose identity has not been disclosed, was formally arrested last month after several months of investigation into people distributing images in Telegram chat rooms. Police seized the officer’s phone in August, and a forensic examination (a process for recovering and examining data from electronic devices) found about 2,600 deepfake images, about 1,600 child sexual exploitation images and about 1,300 illegally filmed images.

The officer is suspected of using artificial intelligence to create about 400 nude images of acquaintances between March 2022 and July of this year, and distributing dozens of them in Telegram chat rooms. Deepfakes are images or videos created or manipulated using artificial intelligence to make them appear to depict real people. The reported file counts were given by category, but it has not been confirmed whether there is overlap between them.

Background and context

The case came to light when police seized the officer’s phone while tracing people distributing images in online chat rooms and examined the material on it. The investigation is not limited to simple possession of files. It also includes allegations that the officer created nude images of acquaintances and posted some of them in chat rooms.

The officer was also investigated for a similar offense before joining the force and received a deferred prosecution decision (기소유예), according to the investigation. The information made public does not say which statutory provisions have been applied in this case or how the earlier disposition may affect the current investigation.

A Dongdaemun Police Station official said the officer was placed on standby for reassignment as soon as the station was notified of the case and has been removed from duty. This confirms action taken by the organization after it learned of the case, but reports do not establish whether an internal investigation or further personnel measures took place.

What this news means

People depicted in the images are not the only ones who may be harmed. If images created from real photographs are distributed without the people’s consent, they may find their likeness circulating in depictions of things they were never photographed doing. However, the identities of the acquaintances or children shown in the images, the number of victims and the actual extent of distribution in this case have not been confirmed.

The officer has been removed from duty, but that measure does not establish criminal liability. Allegations must be distinguished from established facts until the investigation and trial conclude.

For example, if someone learns that an image with their face superimposed has been posted in an online chat room, the police measures confirmed in this case alone do not establish who created that image or how widely it was distributed. Separate investigative findings would be needed to establish the scale of harm, the people involved and the distribution channels.

Relevant procedures and support information

Detention is not the same as a final conviction. According to internal legal guidance, a suspect detained during the investigation stage may request a review of the legality of detention (구속적부심사), a procedure asking a court to reconsider whether the detention is appropriate. The suspect, as well as the suspect’s lawyer, spouse, lineal relatives, siblings, family members, cohabitants or employer, among others, may file the request.

The procedure changes after charges are filed. A defendant who has been charged may apply for bail (보석), and the court considers the specific circumstances before deciding whether to grant it and setting conditions. Thus, a review of the legality of detention applies to suspects at the investigation stage, while bail applies to defendants who have been charged; neither procedure guarantees release simply because an application is filed. Bail may be revoked or the security deposit forfeited if the conditions are violated or the defendant fails to appear in court without a valid reason.

It has not been disclosed whether the suspect’s side applied for any procedure in this case or whether charges have been filed. The legal guidance describes general procedures, so actual eligibility and the court’s decision must be assessed in light of the stage of the case and its specific circumstances.

What is confirmed and what remains unknown

Confirmed facts

  • The officer was assigned to the Seoul Dongdaemun Police Station, and the officer’s identity has not been disclosed.
  • The officer was formally arrested last month after several months of investigation, and police seized the phone in August.
  • The forensic examination found about 2,600 deepfake images, about 1,600 child sexual exploitation images and about 1,300 illegally filmed images.
  • The officer is suspected of creating about 400 nude images of acquaintances between March 2022 and July of this year, and distributing dozens of them in Telegram chat rooms.
  • After being notified of the case, the Dongdaemun Police Station placed the officer on standby for reassignment and removed the officer from duty.

What remains unknown

  • What is the officer’s identity, and which specific statutory provisions have been applied?
  • What stage have the investigation and trial over the alleged creation and distribution of the images reached?
  • What are the identities of the acquaintances or children depicted, the confirmed number of victims and the extent of the harm?
  • Do the reported image file counts by category overlap?

What readers should look for

  • Follow-up reporting may establish which statutory provisions have been applied and whether charges have been filed. What is currently known is the arrest and the allegations; the status of any trial has not been confirmed.
  • Readers can distinguish whether the identities of people depicted in the images or the scale of harm have been officially confirmed. Current reports have not disclosed this information.
  • If someone needs to check procedures for a detained acquaintance or family member, they should not confuse a review of the legality of detention at the investigation stage with bail after charges are filed, and should consult a legal professional about eligibility and conditions.

References