[Digital Today reporter Seulgi Son] The amended Information and Communications Network Act will take effect on July 7, imposing up to five times punitive damages and fines of up to 1 billion won for distributing false and manipulated information. The revision is intended to strengthen relief for damage from the spread of so-called fake news, but online users ahead of its enforcement have voiced concerns such as, "Won't we be able to post comments freely?" and "Is this going to censor KakaoTalk?"

Will people be punished for a wrong comment?

Even a comment could be subject to ordinary damages if it intentionally or negligently spreads false or manipulated information and causes harm to others.

The law specifies the regulated party as the "poster", regardless of the form of the post. A poster refers to a person who uses an information and communications service to post and distribute information that they directly produced or selected on an information and communications network.

When deciding whether to apply enhanced damages that increase the loss amount by up to five times, a court additionally considers four requirements. These are whether the information is false or manipulated (falsity), whether the poster knew it (awareness), whether there was an intent to cause harm or obtain unjust gain (purpose), and whether the victim's personal rights or property rights were actually infringed (infringement). Simple expressions of opinion or criticism, or political assertions themselves, do not meet these requirements.

Separately from punishment, it is also possible to delete a post or comment or restrict its exposure. If a report is received, a platform may determine whether a general user's post or comment violates its rules under its autonomous operating policy and take deletion or exposure-limiting measures. In that case, the poster is notified of the reason for the measure and the procedure for filing an objection.

Can people be punished for merely sharing something without knowing it is fake?

In principle, no. If a person could not know at all whether it was false and was not negligent, there is no liability for damages. If there is no awareness or purpose among the four requirements for enhanced damages (falsity, awareness, purpose and infringement), it is also not subject to enhanced damages. If there were grounds to believe it was true, it is decided depending on the individual case. Still, liability may be recognized if the person repeatedly spreads it even after learning it is false.

Are KakaoTalk or text messages also subject to enforcement?

Partly. Private communications such as messengers, email and notes are excluded from regulation. However, services where an unspecified number of people participate and information is openly distributed, such as open chat, may be included based on their openness and spread, making it necessary to watch future court judgments.

Who decides whether information is false or manipulated, and how?

Platforms make the initial determination. If a party objects, it may file a renewed objection with the platform or go through procedural mediation by the dispute mediation division of the Broadcast Media and Communications Deliberation Committee. If a substantive dispute remains, a final determination is sought through a civil lawsuit in court.

Specifically, the platform as the initial decision-maker follows guidelines from the Korea Internet Self-Governance Organization (KISO) as the criteria. Criteria include the truthfulness of the core message, the overall context and whether it has a deceptive appearance. Based on this, platforms establish their own autonomous operating policies and manage services accordingly. For cases that are difficult for platforms to assess on their own, they can refer to verification reports by fact-checking organizations whose agreements are supported by the transparency center under the Broadcast Media and Communications Commission.

If there is an objection to such measures, both the reporter and the poster can file an objection with the platform within 6 months. It is also possible to apply for dispute mediation with the dispute mediation division of the deliberation committee. However, the deliberation committee does not review whether the information is false or manipulated. It only examines whether there was a procedural problem in the platform's measure.

The final judgment on whether content actually constitutes false or manipulated information and whether there is liability for damages lies with the courts. A court ruling is required for damages or enhanced damages to be confirmed.

Is content deleted immediately when a report is filed?

No. A reporter must file a report by stating the specific location (URL) of the reported information, the content and reason for the report, supporting materials, contact information and name. A platform notifies the reporter that it received the report, reviews whether there is a violation under its operating policy, and then decides whether to take measures such as deletion, blocking, or account suspension. If it takes measures, it must notify both the reporter and the poster of the reason and the procedure for filing an objection.

Is the government directly censoring content?

The government's explanation is "no". The Broadcast Media and Communications Commission explained that it protected freedom of expression by excluding false and manipulated information from the deliberation committee's review targets, and that determinations are to be made under platforms' autonomous policies. The government's position is that while the transparency center provides administrative and financial support to fact-checking organizations, it does not get involved in the selection of topics for fact-checking or in procedures and content.

How are actual punishment and compensation targets divided?

They are largely divided into three categories. Ordinary damages apply to any poster who intentionally or negligently distributes false or manipulated information and causes harm to others. There are no requirements such as subscriber counts or view counts.

Enhanced damages and administrative fines have different requirements. Enhanced damages apply to posters who, over the previous 3 months, posted at least 3 items and earned revenue such as advertising, and who have at least 100,000 subscribers or at least 100,000 average monthly views. If the requirements are met, a court may set damages at up to five times the loss amount.

Administrative fines apply to posters who, over the previous 3 months, posted at least 3 items and earned revenue, and who repeatedly distributed at least twice information that a court has definitively ruled to be illegal and false or manipulated. Subscriber and view-count criteria do not apply. The commission may impose administrative fines of up to 1 billion won.

Platform operators that distribute information are not subject to enhanced damages. The subject is the poster. If the occurrence of damage is recognized but it is difficult to calculate the amount, the court may set a reasonable amount as damages within 50 million won.

Are media reports also subject to regulation?

Yes. Media companies can also be considered posters and may bear liability for distributing false or manipulated information. This applies whether the content is posted on a newspaper company's own website, on news portals such as Naver and Daum, or on social media channels such as YouTube and Instagram. If the poster, over the previous 3 months, posted at least 3 items and earned revenue, and has at least 100,000 subscribers or at least 100,000 average monthly views, it may also be subject to enhanced damages.

However, reporting for the public interest, or cases where there were reasonable grounds to believe the content was true at the time of distribution, are excluded from enhanced damages.

Separately from punishment, a platform cannot arbitrarily delete or block a media company's account or posts, or suspend the account, based on reports.

Why does controversy continue?

It is because platforms can decide to delete content or limit its exposure before a court judgment. Civic groups and users express concern that a chilling effect could emerge, with platforms excessively deleting posts out of fear of legal liability. On May 26, a petition titled "Call for withdrawal of the Information and Communications Network Act" was posted on the National Assembly's public petition site. In a little over a month, 142,248 people agreed. The petition was referred on July 3 to the National Assembly Science, ICT, Broadcasting and Communications Committee, the competent standing committee.