[Invest&Law] The Weight of Penalties Too Light for YouTubers Earning Hundreds of Millions

Prosecution to Strengthen Handling of Defamation and Insult Crimes
Active Requests for Formal Trials... Minimum Sentencing Guidelines Raised for Summary Indictments
Emphasis Shifts from Freedom of Expression to Greater Accountability
Need to Rationalize Sentencing Guidelines Based on Degree of Harm

The prosecution has revised its case handling standards to respond more strongly to crimes involving defamation through the dissemination of false information. For crimes such as defamation and insult, prosecutors will actively request formal trials, and even in summary indictment cases (which typically result in fines), the minimum sentencing guideline for defamation by false information has been raised by 2 million won.

According to the revised directive, the prosecution will categorize defamation and insult crimes based on motives such as profit-seeking, retaliation or slander, fake news, repeated or recidivist offenses, serious harm, and slander related to major disasters. For cases falling under these categories, prosecutors will request formal trials to impose stricter punishment. In cases with significant potential for social criticism or widespread impact, prosecutors are also instructed to actively pursue pretrial detention.

Stricter Punishment for 'Cyber Leaker' YouTubers

In particular, there have been concerns that while false information and extreme claims have rapidly spread through YouTube channels, the resulting punishments have been minimal compared to the harm caused. As of 2024, the summary indictment rate for cases involving violations of the Information and Communications Network Act (defamation), defamation, insult, and violations of the Framework Act on Telecommunications was 94.9%, meaning the vast majority of cases were handled as summary offenses. The background for revising prosecution guidelines stems from the recognition that social regulation has not kept pace with the rapid development of online personal media.

Within the legal community, there are calls to shift from a law enforcement policy that broadly recognizes freedom of expression to one that strengthens accountability, and to adjust the courts' sentencing guidelines accordingly. Recently, courts have been handing down relatively heavy sentences to YouTube 'cyber leakers' who have persistently engaged in malicious slander by disclosing the personal information of ordinary people or specifying false information.

On April 18, the Changwon District Court sentenced the operator of a YouTube channel to three years in prison for disclosing the identities of perpetrators in connection with the Miryang middle school gang rape case (violations of the Information and Communications Network Act (defamation), Stalking Punishment Act, etc.). On April 29, the Suwon District Court Criminal Division 6-1 sentenced YouTuber Lee Junhee (alias Gujeok) to a fine of 3 million won in an appellate trial for defamation under the Information and Communications Network Act. On January 15, Incheon District Court Criminal Division 11, Judge Kim Saetbyeol, sentenced the operator of the YouTube channel Taldeok Suyongso, who posted videos maliciously slandering celebrities such as Jang Wonyoung of the girl group IVE and earned hundreds of millions of won, to two years in prison with a three-year suspended sentence and ordered the forfeiture of 200 million won for defamation and insult under the Information and Communications Network Act.

Calls for More Bold Imprisonment Sentences

Many have pointed out that fines of several million won and suspended prison sentences have little deterrent effect. For YouTubers earning hundreds of millions of won, the profits from spreading false information far outweigh the penalties, rendering the rulings ineffective. As a result, there are suggestions to revise sentencing guidelines for defamation by false information to include "cases of economic gain" as a special aggravating factor. Cha Jina, a professor at Korea University Law School, stated, "Rather than amending the law to increase statutory penalties, it is necessary to rationalize sentencing guidelines so that courts impose sentences commensurate with the degree of harm."

Along with revising sentencing guidelines, some believe judges should also take steps to prevent recidivism when issuing rulings. On April 18, Changwon District Court Criminal Division 6, Chief Judge Woo Sangbeom, sentenced the operator of the YouTube channel Jiphaengin to three years in prison and ordered the forfeiture of 5.56 million won for violations of the Information and Communications Network Act (defamation) and the Stalking Punishment Act, stating, "This is a typical form of 'private sanction' that cannot be tolerated in modern society and constitutes a serious crime that threatens the foundation of the rule of law."

The prosecution has also announced its intention to thoroughly confiscate criminal proceeds related to cyber defamation. From the investigation stage, authorities will identify criminal proceeds and take measures to preserve, confiscate, and recover them.

Im Hyunkyung, Hong Yoonji, Legal Times Reporters

※This article is based on content supplied by Law Times.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.