19
Reference Notes
1
Nicholas D. Kristof, “Seoul’s Leader Irked by Opposition Criticism at U.N. over Rights,” New York Times, April 23, 1999, at
A5 (quoting a Western diplomat in Seoul).
2
Id.
3
Bill Kovach, Remarks at the Korean Press Center Seminar, July 14, 1997.
4
Cha Yong-bom, Trends in the Changing Standards for Court Decisions in Public Figure Libel Cases (Korean) 1 (2002)
(unpublished paper).
5
Constitutional Court, 97 Honma 265, June 24, 1999.
6
Taegyu Son, The Law of Political Libel and Freedom of the Press in the Republic of Korea and the U.S. 3-4 (2002) (unpublished
Ph.D. dissertation proposal, University of North Carolina--Chapel Hill) (on file with author) (citations omitted).
7
Harry Kalven, Jr., A Worthy Tradition 63 (Jamie Kalven ed., 1988). See also Monroe E. Price & Peter Krug, The Enabling
Environment for Free and Independent Media § 4.3.3.3, at 64 (2000).
8
Constitution, last amended in 1987, art. 21.
9
For a discussion of the constitutional history of press freedom in Korea up to 1996, see Kyu Ho Youm, Press Law in South
Korea 45-93 (1996).
10
Constitution (1987), art. 37(2).
11
In Korean law, defamation is defined as an act that undermines the social esteem in which a reputational entity is held.
Supreme Court, 96 Ta 38032, Oct. 28, 1997.
12
Criminal Act (1995), art. 307 (emphasis added). The Supreme Court held that "alleging facts" in the Criminal Act is
distinguished from "a statement of opinion" which contains value judgments or evaluation:
A factual allegation is a report or statement concerning concrete factual relations ...; its contents are
susceptible to evidentiary proof. Whether a statement is factual or opinion-based should be determined by
considering the entire circumstances including the ordinary meaning and usage of the language used, the
provability of its truth or falsehood, the context of the statement and the social milieu in which the expression
was used.
Supreme Court, 97 To 2956, March 24, 1998.
13
Id. art. 309 (emphasis added).
14
The Supreme Court stated that libel is subject to more severe punishment than slander in the Criminal Act because the former is
more widely disseminated, more credible, and more permanent than the latter. Supreme Court, 97 To 133, Aug. 26, 1997.
15
Criminal Act (1995), art. 310.
16
Civil Code (1997), art. 751.
17
Id. art. 764. The Supreme Court defined "reputation" under Article 764 of the Civil Code as "an objective evaluation by other
people of one's character, morality, good name, credit, etc." Supreme Court, 96 Ta 17851, Oct. 24, 1997.
Convention