Open Decision Ledger · Criminal law
Truth, public interest and the threshold for insult
Supreme Court, May 29, 2025, 2024Do14555 (judgment)
No holding summary · checked against points at issue. The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Case name: 명예훼손·모욕
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Were the banners and monitor screen installed by Defendants 1 and 2 about the president of the residents' representative council justified under Article 310 of the Criminal Act, and did the two expressions the prosecution specified amount to insult under Article 311?
Holding
On both counts the answer went against the conviction. The Court held that the important parts of the banner and monitor text matched objective facts, that a matter concerning the common life of residents carries public interest even though it relates only to a particular group, and that the defendants' principal motive was to normalise the residents' representative council and protect the residents' common benefit, so the private purposes mixed into it did not bar Article 310. It also held that the two expressions specified as insult were no more than mild abstract or rude expressions carrying negative and critical opinions, which, absent special circumstances, do not infringe external reputation.
Points at issue, verbatim
행위자의 주요한 동기나 목적인 공공의 이익에 부수적으로 다른 사익적 목적이나 동기가 내포되어 있는 경우, 형법 제310조의 적용 여부(적극)
Unofficial English translation
Where motives or purposes of a private nature are contained incidentally to the public interest, which is the principal motive or purpose of the actor, whether Article 310 of the Criminal Act applies (affirmative)
Disposition
Reversed and remanded Stated in the decision
원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 부산지방법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Busan District Court.
Form of the test
Circumstances weighed Stated in the decision
사실의 내용과 성질, 사실의 공표가 이루어진 상대방의 범위, 표현의 방법 등 표현 자체에 관한 여러 사정을 감안함과 동시에 표현에 의하여 훼손되거나 훼손될 수 있는 명예의 침해 정도 등을 비교·고려하여 결정해야 하며
Unofficial English translation
must be determined by taking into account various circumstances relating to the expression itself, such as the content and nature of the fact, the scope of the counterparties to whom the fact was made public, and the method of expression, and at the same time comparatively considering the degree of infringement of the honor that has been or may be impaired by the expression, and
Factors
- 형법 제310조의 위법성조각사유 요건 중 ‘진실한 사실’ 및 ‘오로지 공공의 이익에 관한 때’의 의미
- 적시된 사실이 ‘공공의 이익’에 관한 것인지 판단하는 기준
- 행위자의 주요한 동기나 목적인 공공의 이익에 부수적으로 다른 사익적 목적이나 동기가 내포되어 있는 경우, 형법 제310조의 적용 여부(적극)
- 상대방을 불쾌하게 할 수 있는 무례하고 예의에 벗어난 정도의 표현이거나 상대방에 대한 부정적·비판적 의견이나 감정을 나타내면서 경미한 수준의 추상적 표현이나 욕설이 사용된 경우, 모욕죄의 구성요건에 해당하는지 여부(원칙적 소극)
- 모욕죄의 구성요건을 해석·적용할 때 개인의 인격권과 표현의 자유가 함께 고려되어야 하는지 여부(적극)
Unofficial English translation
• The meanings of 'true fact' and 'where the fact relates solely to public interest' among the requirements of grounds for the exclusion of unlawfulness under Article 310 of the Criminal Act
• The criteria for determining whether a fact stated relates to 'public interest'
• Where motives or purposes of a private nature are contained incidentally to the public interest, which is the principal motive or purpose of the actor, whether Article 310 of the Criminal Act applies (affirmative)
• Whether an expression that is discourteous and goes beyond the bounds of politeness to the extent that it may cause discomfort to the other party, or that presents negative or critical opinions or feelings toward the other party while employing abstract expressions or abusive language of a minor degree, constitutes the constituent elements of the crime of insult (in principle, negative)
• Whether the personality rights of the individual and the freedom of expression must be considered together when interpreting and applying the constituent elements of the crime of insult (affirmative)
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2022. 2. 11. 선고 2021도10827 판결
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2021Do10827 decided February 11, 2022
Decisions referred to
[1][2] 대법원 2022. 2. 11. 선고 2021도10827 판결, 대법원 2022. 7. 28. 선고 2020도8421 판결, 대법원 2023. 2. 2. 선고 2022도13425 판결(공2023상, 572) / [2] 대법원 2020. 11. 19. 선고 2020도5813 전원합의체 판결(공2021상, 57) / [3] 대법원 2022. 8. 31. 선고 2019도7370 판결(공2022하, 2066), 대법원 2024. 10. 8. 선고 2022도15971 판결
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
How far may the truthful part of a statement be exaggerated or coloured before it ceases to be a 'truthful fact' under Article 310?
The judgment the Busan District Court delivers on remand, finding or rejecting justification on this record, will show how the Court's standard works in practice. A later decision on the boundary of 'truthful fact' or on the threshold of insult, or an amendment to Articles 307, 310 or 311 of the Criminal Act, would require this entry to be read again.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
8 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-25
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on all 8 axes.
Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Busan District Court, in its judgment of 27 August 2024 (2023No3092) on appeal, left in place the first-instance guilty verdicts on the defamation and insult charges. It stressed in red the passages about the victim's visits to entertainment establishments and calling hostesses and drinking whisky, treated expressions meaning 'fooling the residents', 'spending money as if it were water', 'shameless' and 'stop the victim's cosplay' as abusive words, and held that the banner and monitor text defamed and insulted the victim without Article 310 of the Criminal Act applying.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that the important parts of the text, that the victim used the council's operating funds in breach of law and the rules and seized a consent form from a resident while assaulting that resident, corresponded to objective facts, and that the defendants' principal motive was the normalisation of the council and the protection of the residents' common benefit, so the secondary private purposes did not exclude Article 310. On insult it held that the expressions specified by the prosecution, appearing in a longer text installed amid an ongoing dispute over the misappropriation of management fees, were only mild abstract or rude expressions, and that the court below had misread the meaning of insult. It reversed the whole judgment and remanded the case to the Busan District Court, by the unanimous opinion of the Justices.
Distinguishing conditions
- A statement whose important parts do not coincide with objective facts, so that the 'truthful fact' requirement of Article 310 is not met.
- A statement whose principal motive or purpose is not the public interest but a private one, since Article 310 is denied where the actor's main motive is not public-minded.
- A revolting insult that threatens the serious invasion of personality or causes contempt of a degree that ruins the other's character, which the Court placed outside the mild expressions it described.
Record verification notes
Set the words actually installed, in their whole context, against the record of the dispute over the management fees, the audits, the dismissal procedure and the victim's own statements, since the Court relied on that chronology for both truth and public interest. Mark which sentences carry the important content and which are opinion or emotion, and ask whether the principal motive was normalising the council. For the insult count, look at the full text on the monitor and the two expressions in it, and record the relationship, the circumstances and the weight each expression carries in the whole.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 형법 제310조의 위법성조각사유 요건 중 ‘진실한 사실’ 및 ‘오로지 공공의 이익에 관한 때’의 의미 / 적시된 사실이 ‘공공의 이익’에 관한 것인지 판단하는 기준 / 행위자의 주요한 동기나 목적인 공공의 이익에 부수적으로 다른 사익적 목적이나 동기가 내포되어 있는 경우, 형법 제310조의 적용 여부(적극) [2] 사실적시의 내용이 사회 일반의 일부 이익에만 관련된 사항이거나 개인에 관한 사항이라도 공익성이 인정되는 경우 / 사인의 경우 공공의 이익에 관련되는지 판단하는 기준 [3] 모욕죄의 보호법익(=외부적 명예) 및 ‘모욕’의 의미 / 어떠한 표현이 모욕죄의 ‘모욕’에 해당하는지 판단하는 기준 / 상대방을 불쾌하게 할 수 있는 무례하고 예의에 벗어난 정도의 표현이거나 상대방에 대한 부정적·비판적 의견이나 감정을 나타내면서 경미한 수준의 추상적 표현이나 욕설이 사용된 경우, 모욕죄의 구성요건에 해당하는지 여부(원칙적 소극) / 모욕죄의 구성요건을 해석·적용할 때 개인의 인격권과 표현의 자유가 함께 고려되어야 하는지 여부(적극)
Unofficial English translation
[1] The meanings of 'true fact' and 'where the fact relates solely to public interest' among the requirements of grounds for the exclusion of unlawfulness under Article 310 of the Criminal Act / The criteria for determining whether a fact stated relates to 'public interest' / Where motives or purposes of a private nature are contained incidentally to the public interest, which is the principal motive or purpose of the actor, whether Article 310 of the Criminal Act applies (affirmative) [2] Where the content of the fact stated relates only to the interest of some part of society in general, or where the matter concerns an individual but is nevertheless recognized as serving the public interest / The criteria for determining whether a matter relates to public interest in the case of a private person [3] The protected legal interest of the crime of insult (= external honor) and the meaning of 'insult' / The criteria for determining whether a certain expression constitutes an 'insult' under the crime of insult / Whether an expression that is discourteous and goes beyond the bounds of politeness to the extent that it may cause discomfort to the other party, or that presents negative or critical opinions or feelings toward the other party while employing abstract expressions or abusive language of a minor degree, constitutes the constituent elements of the crime of insult (in principle, negative) / Whether the personality rights of the individual and the freedom of expression must be considered together when interpreting and applying the constituent elements of the crime of insult (affirmative)
Summary of the holding
The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Order
원심판결을 파기하고, 사건을 부산지방법원에 환송한다.
Unofficial English translation
The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Busan District Court.
Provisions referred to
[1] 형법 제307조 제1항, 제310조 [2] 형법 제307조 제1항, 제310조 [3] 헌법 제21조 제1항, 제4항, 형법 제311조
Read 2026-10-25 · Cross-read 2026-10-25. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger