Changwon Law Office | The Changwon Law Office Assisted a Client Charged with Defamation and Interference with Business, Obtaining a No-Prosecution Decision

As in the case of this client, 🔗online defamation is the act of, for the purpose of disparaging another person, publicly alleging facts or false facts through an information and communications network and thereby harming that person's reputation. It refers to "defamation committed in cyberspace."

According to case law, "online defamation" is recognized when someone, in order to disparage a person, posts factual or false content on the internet where many people can view it and thereby harms that person's reputation.

Under the "Information and Communications Network Act," a person who, in order to disparage another person, posts factual or false content on the internet where many people can view it and thereby harms that person's reputation may be subject to criminal punishment.

Where factual content is posted, the offender is subject to imprisonment with labor for up to three years or a fine of up to 30 million won, and where false content is posted, the offender is subject to imprisonment with labor for up to seven years, suspension of qualifications for up to ten years, or a fine of up to 50 million won.

🔗Interference with business is a crime established when a person interferes with another's business, and interfering with another person's commercial activity or business is subject to criminal punishment. Interfering with business by spreading false facts also constitutes this crime.

The Changwon law office argued that, because the complainant was using the client company's sales and marketing methods in a similar manner and causing confusion among consumers, the comment was written for that reason.

The term ‘public interest’ includes not only matters concerning the interests of the state, society, and the general public at large, but also matters concerning the interests and concerns of a particular social group or its members. (See Supreme Court Decision 2001Do3594, October 9, 2001.)

The Changwon law office argued that the client had not realized this constituted interference with business.

This was because the client had believed the writing was prepared for the public interest.

The Changwon law office emphasized that, unless defamation was established, the interference with business premised upon it was likewise not established.