수지 악성 댓글 ‘무죄’ 판결, 대법원서 뒤집혀 [문화광장] / KBS 2022.12.29.

Summary

After seven years of legal proceedings, the Supreme Court has ruled on the defamation case involving singer and actress Suzy. A man, identified as A, was accused of posting malicious comments about Suzy on an online article in 2015. While the first court convicted him and imposed a fine, the second court ruled in his favor, citing freedom of expression. However, the Supreme Court overturned the decision, acknowledging that A's comments sexually objectified and degraded Suzy, thus constituting defamation. This case raises questions about the impact of internet comment culture, especially regarding harmful and misogynistic remarks.

Takeaways

• 😀 A seven-year-long legal battle over malicious comments directed at singer and actress Suzy has concluded with a ruling from the Supreme Court.
• 😀 A 40-year-old man, A, was prosecuted in 2015 for posting malicious comments about Suzy in response to an online article.
• 😀 In the first trial, A was found guilty and fined 1 million KRW for his actions.
• 😀 However, the second trial court overturned the verdict, ruling A not guilty under the premise of freedom of expression for public figures.
• 😀 The Supreme Court reversed the second trial's decision and sent the case back to the Seoul Northern District Court for further review.
• 😀 The court recognized that some of A's comments were degrading and sexualized Suzy, leading to a conviction for defamation.
• 😀 The ruling emphasizes that criticism of public figures' professional activities is permissible under law but that misogynistic and demeaning expressions are not acceptable.
• 😀 The case highlights the importance of distinguishing between lawful criticism and harmful speech that targets individuals with misogyny or objectification.
• 😀 The outcome of this case may have significant implications for both the entertainment industry and online comment culture in South Korea.
• 😀 The ruling underscores the need for legal protections against harmful online behavior, especially regarding public figures and women.

Q & A

What was the key issue in the lawsuit involving Suzy, the singer and actress?

The key issue was the malicious comments made by a man, referred to as A, on an internet article about Suzy in 2015. These comments led to a legal dispute regarding defamation and whether A's actions should be punished.

What was the outcome of the first trial regarding the case?

In the first trial, the court found A guilty and imposed a fine of 1 million Korean Won for his malicious comments.

How did the second trial differ from the first one?

In the second trial, the court overturned the first ruling, stating that public figures, such as celebrities, should be allowed more freedom of expression. As a result, the court declared A not guilty.

What did the Supreme Court decide in this case?

The Supreme Court disagreed with the second trial's decision and sent the case back to the Seoul Northern District Court for further review. The Supreme Court acknowledged that some of A's comments were degrading and objectifying toward Suzy, recognizing them as a form of defamation.

What was the reason the Supreme Court found A guilty of defamation?

The Supreme Court determined that A's comments were offensive and objectified Suzy in a sexual manner, which is a form of defamation and violates the victim's dignity.

What distinction did the court make regarding criticism of public figures like Suzy?

The court acknowledged that criticism of public figures' professional activities is permitted under the law, but it emphasized that expressions of misogyny or demeaning comments are unacceptable and should not be protected under freedom of expression.

What impact might the Supreme Court's ruling have on internet comment culture?

The ruling could influence the way malicious and harmful comments are treated, potentially discouraging the spread of misogynistic or defamatory content online and encouraging more responsible online discourse.

What does the case suggest about the boundaries of freedom of speech in South Korea?

The case suggests that while freedom of speech is important, there are limits when it comes to harmful and defamatory speech, especially when it comes to degrading individuals, particularly public figures and women.

How long did it take for the case to reach a final ruling?

It took seven years for the case to reach a final ruling by the Supreme Court.

Why is this case significant in the context of South Korean entertainment and online culture?

This case is significant because it addresses the growing issue of malicious online comments and their impact on public figures in South Korea, highlighting the importance of balancing freedom of expression with respect and dignity in online interactions.