지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
When freedom of expression, One of the basic principles of liberal democracy, conflicts with personal rights related to a person’s honor, it became a serious problem of defamation. However, there is no clear definition in concept of public figures in Korea.
As a result, there is ongoing discussion on requirements and scope of defamation by precedents when defamation of public figures case occurs. News reports to public figures often get involved in lawsuit cases, still, predictable decision criteria is not presented.
In the United States, defamation of public figures has a historic decision, New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964, that presented the actual malice rule. It switched the burden of proof of establishment of defamation to the complainants, therefore, it constructed legal theory as establishing a responsibility of illegal act on public employee and public persons requires actual malice. Through this construction, it interprets the subjective requirements strictly, and make the complainants take the burden of proof of existing subjective requirements.
On the other hand, legal concept of public figures is being discussed on criminal cases such as crimes against reputation or defamation through printed materials. ‘Intent to defame another’ is regulated as a part of requirements in Article 309, Criminal Act of Korea. In Article 310, the Justification of crimes against reputation is establish only in the course of pursuing solely for the public interest and the legal concept of public figures is used.
In addition, Constitutional Court stated that the constitutional examination standard shall be different from whether the victim’s position or the content of expressions can be applied to public concern or not.
As a result, there is ongoing discussion on requirements and scope of defamation by precedents when defamation of public figures case occurs. News reports to public figures often get involved in lawsuit cases, still, predictable decision criteria is not presented.
In the United States, defamation of public figures has a historic decision, New York Times v. Sullivan in 1964, that presented the actual malice rule. It switched the burden of proof of establishment of defamation to the complainants, therefore, it constructed legal theory as establishing a responsibility of illegal act on public employee and public persons requires actual malice. Through this construction, it interprets the subjective requirements strictly, and make the complainants take the burden of proof of existing subjective requirements.
On the other hand, legal concept of public figures is being discussed on criminal cases such as crimes against reputation or defamation through printed materials. ‘Intent to defame another’ is regulated as a part of requirements in Article 309, Criminal Act of Korea. In Article 310, the Justification of crimes against reputation is establish only in the course of pursuing solely for the public interest and the legal concept of public figures is used.
In addition, Constitutional Court stated that the constitutional examination standard shall be different from whether the victim’s position or the content of expressions can be applied to public concern or not.
목차
Abstracts
Ⅰ. Introduction
Ⅱ. Theoretical Background of Defamation on Public Figures
Ⅲ. Theoretical Backgrounds of Defamation of Public Figures
Ⅳ. Adjudicative standard of defamation of public figures
Ⅴ. Conclusion
REFERENCES
참고문헌 (37)
참고문헌 신청
1. [단행본] - Bryan A. Garner / 2004 / Black’s Law Dictionary / West
2. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 차진아 / 2012 / 표현의 자유의 구조와 성격에 관한 연구 - 오프라인과 온라인상 실현방식에 대한 비교를 중심으로 - / 법학연구 53 (3) : 1 ~ 29
3. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Kim Jin / 2012 / On the Case of Libel against a Public Figure: In Search of New Approaches, Supreme Prosecutors’ Office / New Trends of Criminal Law 36
4. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Kim, Min-Joong / 2000 / Plaintiff’s Status and the Applicability of Defamation Law / Press Arbitration 75
5. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Kim, Min-Joong / 2003 / Public Figures and Public Relations in Defamation : Supreme Court of Korea, 2002. 1. 22, 2000Da37524 Decision / The Justice 75
2. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 차진아 / 2012 / 표현의 자유의 구조와 성격에 관한 연구 - 오프라인과 온라인상 실현방식에 대한 비교를 중심으로 - / 법학연구 53 (3) : 1 ~ 29
3. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Kim Jin / 2012 / On the Case of Libel against a Public Figure: In Search of New Approaches, Supreme Prosecutors’ Office / New Trends of Criminal Law 36
4. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Kim, Min-Joong / 2000 / Plaintiff’s Status and the Applicability of Defamation Law / Press Arbitration 75
5. [학술지(정기간행물)] - Kim, Min-Joong / 2003 / Public Figures and Public Relations in Defamation : Supreme Court of Korea, 2002. 1. 22, 2000Da37524 Decision / The Justice 75
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
명예의 보호와 형사처벌제도의 폐지론과 유지론 : PD수첩 광우병보도 수사에 즈음하여
박경신
서강법학
2009
.06
현대자본주의의 위기와 재구조화 : 세계화·정보화 자본주의의 등장과정
윤상우
사회과학논총
2014
.02
The Proliferation of Internet and Internet Regulation in Korea
Ahn
,
Jungmihn
경제규제와 법
2012
.11
인터넷상의 명예훼손의 실태와 대책
김태명
법학연구
2008
.12
The Tendencies of Current Judicial Decision in Media - related Defamation, and Reality of the Media : Focusing on Case Studies from 2002 to 2005
Dongwoo Chung
언론과법
2005
.12
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0