CONTENTS
- 1. Punishment for Defamation | Details of the Case
- - Legal Information on Punishment for Defamation: Elements of the Offense and the Level of Punishment
- 2. Punishment for Defamation | Matters of Assistance
- - Structuring the Argument Denying Identifiability
- - Proof of Falsity and the Absence of Awareness
- - Emphasis on the Absence of a Purpose of Slander
- 3. Punishment for Defamation | Result of the Assistance
- - Responding to Punishment for Defamation: The ‘Process’ Matters More Than the ‘Result’
1. Punishment for Defamation | Details of the Case
The client who came to Daeryun LLC regarding a defamation punishment matter had posted a writing expressing dissatisfaction and suspicions about the operating practices on the online Q&A board of a membership golf course that the client was using, and was then the subject of a complaint on a charge of defamation under the Network Act.
In the post, the client raised claims in a somewhat blunt and aggressive tone, asserting that a particular member was exercising excessive authority and that the management was responding irresponsibly to the issue of membership eligibility without any official explanation.
The manner of expression and the content conveyed differed in part from the facts, and as a result this gave rise to a misunderstanding that there may have been an intent to harm the reputation of the management.
The other party filed a complaint asserting that the writing was a post made for the purpose of slander based on false facts, and the investigative authorities began to review in earnest whether the requirements for punishment for defamation through an information and communications network were satisfied.
In a critical situation in which criminal punishment also had to be kept in mind, the client recognized that the content of the initial statement and the direction in which the explanation was framed were important, and urgently sought out and requested a consultation with a certified criminal law specialist attorney.
Legal Information on Punishment for Defamation: Elements of the Offense and the Level of Punishment
Punishment for defamation may arise where one publicly discloses facts or false facts capable of undermining another person's social evaluation, and a post made using an information and communications network or similar means may also be subject to criminal punishment.
For punishment for defamation to be recognized, the following requirements must be satisfied.
① Intent (purpose of slander): Whether there was a purpose of disparaging a specific person, rather than a mere opinion
② Publicity: Whether it was in a public form that an unspecified number of persons or a third party could perceive
③ Statement of facts or false facts: A case in which content capable of harming another person's reputation was specifically set forth
④ Act of defamation: That it is an act capable of lowering another person's social evaluation or reputation
In practice, the level of punishment for defamation varies greatly depending on whether the content set forth is ‘true’ or ‘false,’ and on the purpose and circumstances of the expression.
Conduct | Level of Punishment |
|---|---|
Where one publicly states facts and thereby harms another person's reputation | Imprisonment with or without labor for not more than two years, or a fine of not more than 5 million won |
Where one publicly states false facts and thereby harms another person's reputation | Imprisonment for not more than five years, suspension of qualifications for not more than 10 years, or a fine of not more than 10 million won |
Where one harms reputation with facts through an information and communications network | Imprisonment for not more than three years, or a fine of not more than 30 million won |
Where one harms reputation with false facts through an information and communications network | Imprisonment for not more than seven years, suspension of qualifications for not more than 10 years, or a fine of not more than 50 million won |
In addition, even where a defamation charge is recognized, there is a possibility that the sentence may be mitigated or the matter may be concluded with non-prosecution, after comprehensively considering various circumstances such as intent, public-interest purpose, truthfulness, and the relationship with the victim.
Therefore, in a defamation punishment matter, it is very important to examine the elements of the offense closely at the early stage and to respond by accurately analyzing which category the conduct falls under as a matter of legal principle.
2. Punishment for Defamation | Matters of Assistance
In a defamation punishment case, whether the post actually identified a specific person, whether it concerned false facts, and whether there was a purpose of slander become the key issues, so the response strategy was established with a focus on these points.
Structuring the Argument Denying Identifiability
The defense focused on disputing that the ‘identifiability of the victim,’ which is a premise for the establishment of punishment for defamation, was not clear.
The defense organized, together with case-law principles, the point that it was difficult to conclude that the expressions in the post alone pointed to a specific individual, and reflected this in the written opinion.
The defense also attached analytical materials capable of showing that it would be difficult for an actual reader to recognize this objectively.
Proof of Falsity and the Absence of Awareness
The defense emphasized that, although the expressions at issue may have been somewhat exaggerated, when viewed in the overall context they amounted to no more than the raising of suspicions or the expression of opinions based on the facts.
In particular, by pointing out that whether there was ‘awareness of falsity’ was the key issue, the defense substantiated that the client had written the post on the basis of relatively objective materials.
The defense actively invoked the purport of case law that minor differences in the details cannot immediately be concluded to constitute the ‘statement of false facts.’
Emphasis on the Absence of a Purpose of Slander
The defense argued persuasively that the ‘purpose of slander,’ another important requirement for punishment for defamation, was difficult to recognize.
The certified criminal law specialist attorney emphasized that the client's purpose in posting was not a personal attack but a request for an explanation regarding operations and the raising of an issue.
On the basis that the sentence structure was in the form of an inquiry rather than an emotional reproach, the defense denied any intent to slander.
3. Punishment for Defamation | Result of the Assistance
In the defamation punishment case, the investigative authorities issued a disposition of ‘no suspicion of crime (non-prosecution),’ comprehensively considering that the identification of the victim was not clear, that some exaggerated expressions could not immediately be concluded to be false facts, and that there was insufficient evidence to recognize an awareness of falsity or a purpose of slander.
As a result, the client was able to conclude the matter without criminal punishment, and this was the result of strategic assistance that organized the requirements for the establishment of defamation step by step in responding to the case.
Responding to Punishment for Defamation: The ‘Process’ Matters More Than the ‘Result’
Punishment for defamation is not merely a matter of whether criminal punishment is imposed.
It is accompanied by various legal and social risks, such as the records remaining in the course of the investigation, the possibility of expansion into civil litigation, and damage to one's social image.
Because a single statement or a single sentence of explanation can affect the final determination, the initial response strategy comes to determine the result.
By blocking unnecessary expansion of the investigation and responding strategically with both the criminal matter and the potential civil matter in mind, we minimize the client's risk.
If your current situation is related to punishment for defamation, this is the point at which a structured response is needed rather than the mere relief of anxiety.
Please review the course of your case accurately 🔗legal consultation reservationthrough a.
This content is based on actual case studies of Daeryun Law LLC with some adaptations, and the copyright belongs to our firm.
Unauthorized reproduction, duplication, or distribution and other copyright infringements may result in legal action under applicable laws.
