Supreme Court: "Malicious Replies to Defamatory Posts... Difficult to Conclude as Insult Crime"
[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] The Supreme Court has ruled that even if someone posts malicious comments on online posts that defame them, it cannot be definitively considered as the crime of insult.
On the 28th, the Supreme Court's 2nd Division (Presiding Justice Kim Sanghwan) overturned the lower court's ruling that sentenced Mr. A to a fine of 1 million won on charges of insult, and remanded the case to the Seoul Central District Court.
In November 2018, a comment defaming Mr. B was posted on B's Facebook by an account that did not reveal the real name. B judged that the comment was posted by his acquaintance Mr. A, defamed A, disclosed his real name, and also posted a photo of the complaint.
Mr. A repeatedly protested and demanded an apology, claiming he did not post the comment, but B mocked A and refused. Subsequently, A posted comments on B's Facebook such as "I'll show you what happens to an ungrateful bastard" and "XXX doesn't exist," and was tried on charges of insulting B.
The first and second trials found that A's actions constituted insult and sentenced him to a fine of 1 million won. They regarded A's comments as "contemptuous expressions that could lower social evaluation."
Hot Picks Today
!["Rather Than Endure a 1.5 Million KRW Stipend, I'd Rather Earn 500 Million in the U.S." Top Talent from SNU and KAIST Are Leaving [Scientists Are Disappearing] ①](https://cwcontent.asiae.co.kr/asiaresize/93/2026051414165763158_1778735817.jpg)
"Rather Than Endure a 1.5 Million KRW Stipend, I'd Rather Earn 500 Million in the U.S." Top Talent from SNU and KAIST Are Leaving [Scientists Are Disappearing] ①
- "If That's the Case, Why Not Just Buy Stocks?" ETFs in Name Only, Now 'Semiconductor-Heavy' and a Playground for Short-Term Traders
- Is This the Peak? As Others Hesitate..."The Answer Is Clear for Surviving the KOSPI 10,000 Era"
- "I Take Full Responsibility"... Chung Yongjin Issues Direct Apology for Starbucks 'May 18 Controversy' (Update)
- "No Cure Available, Spread Accelerates... Already 105 Dead, American Infected"
The Supreme Court's judgment was different. Considering the context before and after the incident, it ruled that A's comments could not be regarded as insult. The court explained, "Looking at the circumstances under which A posted the comments and the overall context, the expressions used by A were an expression of dissatisfaction or anger toward B, who accused A of being the author of the defamatory comment without verifying the truth." It added, "Although the expressions were rude and vulgar enough to offend the victim, it is difficult to definitively conclude that they were contemptuous expressions that would lower the victim's social evaluation of personal dignity."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
