Singer Chae Rina was reportedly moved to tears by a flood of malicious comments about her appearance.
You also sometimes hear that someone was investigated because of a single sentence they posted online.
Each time, the reaction follows: “Doesn’t everyone write things like that?”
It is worth organizing where the line is drawn.
3-Line Summary
1. Malicious comments are divided into insult and defamation offenses
2. Defamation under the Information and Communications Network Act carries up to 3 years in prison
3. You may be punished even for writing the truth
It Splits Into Two Paths
Different laws apply even to the same comment. There is one dividing point: whether a specific fact was stated.
If someone used only disparaging or demeaning language without stating facts, it is the crime of insult under the Criminal Act. The penalty is imprisonment or confinement for up to 1 year, or a fine of up to 200만 원 (2 million won).
If someone harmed another person’s reputation by stating a specific fact or a false fact, it is defamation. If it was posted online, the Information and Communications Network Act applies, and it is more severe than the Criminal Act.
| What was written | Applicable law | Statutory penalty |
|---|---|---|
| Profanity or disparaging language | Crime of insult | Up to 1 year in prison, fine of up to 200만 원 |
| Statement of fact (online) | Information and Communications Network Act | Up to 3 years in prison, fine of up to 3천만 원 |
| False fact (online) | Information and Communications Network Act | Up to 7 years in prison, fine of up to 5천만 원 |
This Is Where Most People Are Surprised
You may be punished even if what you wrote is true.
This is a feature of Korean law. The Information and Communications Network Act provides for punishment of a person who, “for the purpose of slandering another person, publicly reveals a fact and harms that person’s reputation.” It does not require the statement to be false.
So the defense, “Everything I wrote was true, so why is it a problem?” does not automatically work. However, whether there was a purpose to slander and whether the statement served the public interest are considered together. The fact that a statement is true may weigh favorably in that assessment, but it is not itself a shield from punishment.
“But I Said It in a Group Chat”
This is the second point that often causes trouble.
The law requires publicness. It means a state in which an unspecified number of people or many people can become aware of it. But courts interpret this broadly. Even if it was said to just one person, publicness may be recognized if that person could spread it to others.
This legal doctrine is called the possibility of dissemination. A private chat room or direct message does not automatically fall outside it.
What if a name was not used directly? If people nearby can identify who it is from initials, a nickname, or the circumstances alone, that person is considered specified. The difference between concealing and not concealing the identity is smaller than you might think.
There Is Also a Time Limit for Filing a Complaint
The crime of insult requires the victim to file a complaint before an investigation begins. There is also a filing period: it must be filed within 6 months from the day the victim learns who the offender is.
Online, this period can easily become unclear. The day a person sees a comment and the day they learn who wrote it may be different. That is why, in practice, people are advised to gather materials as soon as they discover it.
Screenshots Alone May Not Be Enough
If you are preserving evidence, cropping only the screen is weak. You should preserve the address where the post appears, the author’s ID or nickname, and the time it was written so it can later be identified. It is better to capture the entire page.
It is best to assume it may be deleted. If people think it could become a problem, most will delete it.
Criminal Procedures Are Not the Only Option
Punishment and compensation are separate tracks. Even if a criminal complaint results in a fine, the state receives that money. If the victim wants compensation, they must file a separate civil claim. You do not have to choose only one, and there is no required order.
Removing the post is another matter. The Information and Communications Network Act allows a person claiming that their rights have been infringed to request that a service provider delete it. Upon receiving the request, the provider may delete it or, if there is a dispute, take a temporary measure that blocks access to it. This is a way to stop exposure first, separately from an investigation.
What Writers Should Check
The same standards apply to people writing casually. Is it directed at a specific individual? Does it contain a specific fact? Is it in a place others can see? If all three overlap, it enters an area the law may examine.
The line between criticism and slander lies in the subject. Evaluations of a work or statement are broadly permitted, but the character changes when it moves to the person themself.
Online posts remain even after they are deleted. Screenshots continue circulating after the original disappears.
So this issue is ultimately also a matter of time. A sentence written in a few seconds can last for years.
What is written here is a general standard, and where an individual case falls depends on the facts. If there is an actual dispute, confirmation from an expert is needed.
References
- Easy-to-Find Practical Law Information Penalties for Internet Defamation, etc.
- Easy-to-Find Practical Law Information Malicious Comments Directed at Influencers Require Caution