가짜뉴스 등 허위사실 표현에 대한 형사적 규제와 그 헌법적 한계

Abstract

In a free democracy, the constitutional freedom of the press and publication holds a great significance. However, in case exercising the right to freedom of the press and publication infringes upon other basic rights or undermines the constitutional order, it is subject to a certain level of limitation. This is clearly stated under Article 21(4) of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, and Article 37(2) of the Constitution also stipulates legal limitations on such freedom under the Principle of Limitation of Basic Rights.<BR> While the expression of one’s personal opinion and the publication of specific facts is legally guaranteed under the right to the freedom of the press and publication, the scope of its guarantee or limitation will differ depending on whether it is an expression of opinion or communication of a fact, and also depending on the factuality of the content.<BR> In particular, when a person expresses one’s opinion, which is an individual’s subjective view, or when a person communicates an objective fact while expressing one’s view, such freedom of the press and publication should be fully protected. However, the expression of falsified facts, or fake news, is not guaranteed on an equal level under the right to the freedom of the press and<BR>publication.<BR> For, while the freedom of the press and publication serves to uphold the foundation of democracy by allowing the free formation and circulation of opinions, the publication or statement of false facts fails to serve such function. Furthermore, such falsified content is likely to defame another person, undermining personal rights and even causing social confusion.<BR> Due to the above mentioned reasons, expressing or circulating false facts such as fake news is regulated by the Constitution as well as other legislative provisions. For example, there are non-criminal regulations like the press arbitration or civil liability compensation. Also such offense may be subject to punishment for defamation under the Criminal Act, or punishment for publication of false facts under the Public Officials Election Act, as well as other criminal regulations. Countries with advanced legislative systems such as Germany or the United States have long implemented both criminal and non-criminal legal actions on the expression of falsified facts, or fake news, based on the countries’ historical, social, and cultural backgrounds. Nevertheless, in imposing criminal punishment, greater scrutiny is required than non-criminal punishment, in that there is a higher possibility of limiting or infringing the constitutional freedom of the press and publication. Under the current law, legal provisions on criminal punishment applicable to the offense of publicizing false facts include defamation under the Criminal Act; defamation under the Information Communication Network Act; publication of false facts under the Public Officials Election Act; and fabrication and circulation of false facts under the National Security Law.<BR> However, concerns have been constantly raised that such criminal regulation may result in violating the constitutional right to freedom of the press and publication. Therefore, it is necessary to compare the current criminal punitive system with foreign judiciaries with advanced legislative systems such as Germany and the United States, and conduct a thorough study on practical cases in order to determine whether there is a violation of the Constitution.<BR> As a result of this study, punishing a defamer under the Criminal Law for circulating false facts may involve abuse of the National Penal Power, due to the issue of “vagueness” of the ‘intent to defame others’ and the condition of No Punishment against Will. In punishing the offense of publication of false facts under the Public Officials Election Act, there is a possibility of violating the Principle of Proportionality due to the de facto mandatory invalidation of election under the mandatory minimum sentence. Punishment for fabricating and circulating false facts under the National Security Law may also infringe upon the Principle of Proportionality due to the uniform and high statutory sentence without distinction on the level of offense. Therefore there is a need to improve current legal provisions to resolve possible issues of constitutionality.<BR> Furthermore, with the increasing level of damage on the victims of fake news, there is a growing argument to introduce new legislation to impose criminal punishment on expressing false facts that cause social conflict and confusion, which previously has not been subject to criminal punishment. While such legal action is deemed necessary, excessive criminal regulation may result in infringing on the freedom of the press and publication. Therefore such legal measures require thorough review to ensure that such measures are introduced on a minimum necessary scale. In conclusion, both the existing criminal regulation and newly introduced legal measures must guarantee the freedom of the press and publication, while contributing to safeguard the constitutional values of personal rights, social order, as well as national security.