Lee Jae-myung Banner Vandalized with 'Fraudster' Graffiti, 40s Fined

The Court: "Inclusion of Critical Phrases Constitutes 'Defamation'"

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Taewon] A man in his 40s who scribbled words like 'fraudster' on a banner of Lee Jae-myung, then the Democratic Party presidential candidate, during last year's presidential election was sentenced to a fine in the first trial.

According to the legal community on the 26th, Moon Byung-chan, presiding judge of the 11th Criminal Division of the Seoul Western District Court, sentenced A (44), who was indicted for damaging the candidate's banner, to a fine of 500,000 won. The court stated as the reason for sentencing, "By damaging the banner of a presidential election candidate, the defendant harmed voters' right to know, the fairness of the election, and the efficiency of election management."

A was prosecuted for writing phrases such as 'No punishment without genetics, manipulation, fraudster' and 'In front of the phrase "competent economic president," words like "fraud, crime" with a black permanent marker on the blank space of the then-candidate's banner hung in front of a bus stop in Yongsan-gu, Seoul, at 3:12 a.m. on February 15 last year.

A's side admitted to writing on the banner. However, they argued that since the writing was small and on an empty space, it could not be considered damage, and that it was an expression of the voter's opinion, so the defendant had no intent to damage.

However, the court judged that the act of writing critical phrases on the banner constituted 'damage.' It also viewed that writing critical phrases impaired the banner's utility and went beyond a legitimate expression of voter opinion.

The court also dismissed A's request for a constitutional review of Article 240, Paragraph 1 of the Public Official Election Act, which punishes those who damage posters, banners, and other promotional facilities, as well as Articles 69 Paragraph 2 and 70 Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Act. The related requests for constitutional review of Article 67 of the Public Official Election Act and Article 12 Paragraph 1 of the National Participation Trial Act were also dismissed.

A constitutional review request is a system where, when it is necessary to determine whether the applied law violates the constitution before trial, the parties or the court can request a review by the Constitutional Court. If the court decides to request a review, the trial is automatically suspended until the constitutional review result is issued.

The court stated the reason for dismissal, saying, "It cannot be considered an unconstitutional provision that violates the principle of prohibition of excess, infringes on equality rights, the right to a fair trial, the right to know, or violates the principle of clarity in criminal law."