South Korea Defamation Laws: Civil & Criminal

Defamation in South Korea is both a civil wrong and a criminal offence, and unusually it can be a crime to publish even a true statement that harms someone's reputation. The core provisions are Articles 307 to 312 of the Criminal Act, with online cases prosecuted under Article 70 of the Information and Communications Network Act.

What counts as defamation in South Korea

Under Article 307 of the Criminal Act, defamation is committed by a person who, publicly and by stating facts, harms the reputation of another. South Korean law is distinctive because liability does not require the statement to be false. Article 307(1) covers publicly stating true facts that damage reputation, while Article 307(2) covers publicly stating false facts. Both require that the statement be made publicly, meaning it was capable of spreading to an unspecified or large number of people. Article 308 separately addresses defamation of a deceased person, which applies only to false statements, and Article 309 covers defamation committed through publications such as newspapers or magazines with intent to disparage. The focus throughout is on the public communication of fact-based assertions that lower a person's social standing.

Civil liability for defamation

A defamation victim in South Korea can pursue civil compensation separately from any criminal case. Civil claims rest on the general tort provisions of the Civil Act, under which a person who unlawfully injures another's reputation must compensate the resulting loss, including non-pecuniary harm such as emotional distress. Courts may also order a suitable measure to restore reputation in addition to or instead of money damages under Article 764 of the Civil Act. There is no fixed statutory cap on defamation damages, and awards are assessed case by case based on factors such as the seriousness of the statement, its reach, and the harm shown. A civil claim can proceed even where a criminal complaint is not pursued, though findings in one forum often influence the other.

Criminal defamation and penalties

South Korea retains and actively enforces criminal defamation. Prosecutions and indictments number in the thousands each year, and the country has historically accounted for a large share of global defamation incarcerations, which is why press-freedom monitors repeatedly call for reform. Penalties scale with whether the statement is true or false and whether it was made online.

Watch out: Stating something true can still be charged as a crime in South Korea. Unlike most jurisdictions, truth alone does not defeat a defamation charge under Article 307(1).

The defences

The principal statutory defence is Article 310 of the Criminal Act, which provides that conduct under Article 307(1) is not punishable if the statement is true and was made solely for the public interest. This defence applies only to true-fact defamation, not to false-fact defamation under Article 307(2), and courts apply it narrowly, requiring the defendant to show the statement was substantially true and that the dominant motive was the public good rather than private grievance. Courts have also recognised that a defendant who had reasonable grounds to believe a statement was true, after appropriate checking, may avoid liability in some circumstances. Consent of the person concerned and statements made in official or privileged settings can also bear on liability. There is no broad public-figure rule equivalent to the United States actual-malice standard.

Online defamation

Defamation committed through an information and communications network is prosecuted under Article 70 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, commonly called the Information and Communications Network Act. Article 70(1) covers disclosing true facts online to disparage a person, and Article 70(2) covers disclosing false facts, with materially heavier maximum penalties than the offline Criminal Act provisions. The law reaches posts on social media, comment sections, messaging platforms, and websites. Article 70(3) provides that these offences cannot be prosecuted against the victim's express wishes, so a victim's complaint or objection is central to whether a case moves forward. Given South Korea's high level of social-media use, cyber defamation complaints are common and the cyber provisions are heavily used in practice.

Remedies, damages and how to bring a claim

A victim has two main routes. The criminal route begins with a complaint to the police or prosecution; for most defamation offences the case cannot proceed against the victim's express objection, so the victim's wishes are decisive, and prosecutors decide whether to indict. The civil route is a lawsuit in the District Court seeking monetary compensation and, where appropriate, a corrective measure such as a retraction or apology-related order under Article 764 of the Civil Act. The two routes can run in parallel. Watch out: civil defamation claims are generally subject to a 3-year limitation period running from when the victim learned of both the damage and the identity of the wrongdoer, so delay can bar a claim.