[According to the Law of Expediency] 67. Media Damage Based on False Facts: What Measures Are Available?

*This content was translated by AI.

A single line of an article about someone can spread to tens of thousands of people with just a few clicks. Once disseminated, such articles become even more problematic if they contain false information.

In cases seeking deletion of articles or prior injunctions, courts weigh the two values of freedom of expression and personality rights. Particularly, preventing reporting in advance or removing already published articles directly restricts freedom of expression; thus, they are permitted only in exceptional circumstances where the report is untrue, unrelated to public interest, involves serious harm that is difficult to recover from (Seoul Western District Court preliminary injunction decision).

This balance shifts depending on "who" is the subject of the report. Monitoring and criticism of public officials or public figures are broadly protected, and media expression regarding matters of public concern receives robust protection (Seoul Central District Court lower court ruling). However, even this protection has limits. Even for public officials, reports that intrude into private spheres or are solely aimed at defamation make it difficult to avoid liability for defamation (Suwon District Court Seongnam Branch lower court ruling).

Many people request immediate deletion of articles posted online, but courts proceed cautiously. If only part of an article is false, restoring reputation through publication of a correction or rebuttal may be preferable to deleting the entire piece. In other words, "deletion" is akin to a last resort; typically, less drastic measures such as corrections and rebuttals are considered first.

Time is also a factor. Damages caused by media reporting occur at the time of publication, and the mere continued presence of an article does not constitute new damages. Furthermore, the right to claim compensation for damages prescribes three years from the date the victim becomes aware of both the damage and the perpetrator; thus, legal action should be taken promptly if necessary. Delaying due to injustice until the deadline passes may result in the very door to relief being closed.

Ultimately, media disputes are not merely about "right versus wrong," but rather about "what, against whom, when, and by what means" to pursue. This nuanced judgment yields different conclusions depending on each specific case. If you are suffering due to media reporting, the first step toward recovery will be designing a strategy with an expert regarding whether your situation warrants correction or deletion, and what measures would be most appropriate.

<© STARNEWS. All rights reserved. No reproduction or redistribution allowed.>

*This content was translated by AI.