Accused of defamation after protesting against harassment in the workplace, indictment not filed due to ‘lack of specificity’

A picket protest containing defamatory content in a public place was sued... The police acknowledged the charges and sent the case to the prosecution.
The prosecution decided not to indict, saying, “There is no personal information or other information on the picket...it is difficult to identify the accuser.”

Office workers who were sued for defamation after going on picket lines to protest against workplace bullying were acquitted by the prosecution.

It was confirmed that the Cheongju District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict three people, including office worker A, on charges of defamation on the 8th of last month.

They were accused of defaming fellow employee B by holding a picket protest in a public location inside and outside the company in April 2023. At the time, Mr. B was pointed out by these people as a perpetrator of workplace harassment.

Mr. B sued the three people for defamation. This was because the pickets used in the protest contained phrases that could damage his reputation.

They denied the charges, saying that the picket did not contain information indicating a specific person. At the same time, it was claimed that at the time, an investigation into another case with similar content was underway within the company, and that it was impossible to tell that the target of the protest was Mr. B just from the words on the picket.

However, the police believed that the charge of defamation was acknowledged. The reason was that, considering that rumors had already spread around the company, it was not difficult to determine that the person responsible for the picket text was Mr. B.

However, the prosecution's judgment was different. The prosecution decided not to file charges, saying, “There are no expressions in the picket content that could reveal the personal information or work department of the complainant or the suspect,” and “It is difficult for a third party to know that the picket content was the complainant just because there were rumors circulating.”

Lawyer Kim In-won of Daeryun Law Firm (Lihan), who defended the suspect, explained, “In order to establish a charge of defamation, specific facts must be stated enough to lower the social evaluation,” adding, “The content of the picket in this case was not a specific fact, but an emotional expression complaining about being a victim of workplace harassment, so it is impossible to establish a charge of defamation.”

 

[View full article]
Sued for defamation after protesting workplace harassment... not indicted due to ‘lack of specificity’ (link)