regulation of all anonymous expressions will excessively restrict the freedom of anonymous expression
and the right to informational self-determination by prioritizing administrative and regulatory
convenience over freedom of expression.
Considering the fact that the restrictions on anonymous freedom of expression during an election
campaign period when free political expressions are most critical are not based on concrete risks but on
abstract possibilities that the Provisions at Issue may lead to a decline in unlawful expression; and the
broad definition of an “internet news site” which is subject to the Provisions at Issue, the restrictions on
fundamental rights that may be imposed by the Provisions at Issue cannot be considered as less
important than the public interest that the Provisions at Issue seeks to achieve.
The fairness of election, an objective of the real-name verification system, can be sufficiently achieved
by other means that do not restrict internet users’ freedom of expression or the right to informational
self-determination. The Public Official Election Act prohibits the
3
distribution of information in violation of the Act by regulating election campaigns which utilize
information and communications networks; persons whose privacy was intruded upon or who were
defamed may make use of means or temporary measures stipulated in the Act on Promotion of
Information and Communication Network Utilization and Information Protection, Etc. including request
for deletion of information; and new measures which do not obstruct internet users’ freedom of
expression and the right to informational self-determination while at the same time preventing the
distortion of public opinion brought about by disinformation can be introduced to secure a fair election.
Above all, various reactive sanctions including prohibition of defamation and slander against candidates
are already in effect against election crimes using the internet. At the current level of technology,
measures specified in the Public Official Election are sufficient enough to identify the personal
information of persons who acted in violation of the Act, thereby ensuring a fair election. Despite the
reactive sanctions already in place, preemptive and comprehensive restriction of all anonymous
expressions through proactive and preventative regulations primarily for the convenience of investigation
and technological expediency to ensure an effective management of elections is tantamount to treating
a vast majority of the people who want to express themselves anonymously as a potential criminal.
The Provisions at Issue restrict the freedom of anonymous expression and the freedom of the press by
forcing users to verify their names on the bulletin board, etc. of an internet news site during an election
campaign period when political expressions are most crucial; and broadly limit the general public’s right
to informational self-determination by regulating all anonymous expressions to prevent their negative
effects. Such disadvantage can never be underestimated as opposed to the public interest of
maintaining fairness in elections.
Therefore, the Provisions at Issue violate the rule against excessive restriction, consequently infringing
upon the freedom of anonymous expression, the freedom of the press and the right to informational
self-determination, etc.