The Supreme Court has ruled that advertising stickers attached to the exterior of vehicles are considered advertisements using means of transportation under current law and therefore subject to reporting requirements.
According to the legal community on the 17th, the Supreme Court's First Division (Presiding Justice Kim Seonsu) overturned the original ruling that acquitted Mr. A, who was charged with violating the Outdoor Advertising Act, and remanded the case to the Incheon District Court.
The court stated, "The lower court erred in maintaining the first trial's acquittal by concluding that the advertising sticker in this case does not constitute an 'advertisement using means of transportation,' thereby misunderstanding the legal principles regarding advertisements using means of transportation under Article 3, Paragraph 1 of the former Outdoor Advertising Act (applicable at the time of the offense, not the current law) and Article 3, Item 13 of its Enforcement Decree, and failing to conduct the necessary examination, which affected the judgment," explaining the reason for the reversal and remand.
Mr. A, a designated driver, was prosecuted for attaching a sticker displaying his designated driving business name and contact information to his Starex van in July 2019 without reporting it to the mayor.
The Outdoor Advertising Act stipulates that to display or install advertisements on means of transportation, one must follow the permission or reporting procedures to the mayor or other local government heads depending on the vehicle type.
The first and second trial courts acquitted Mr. A.
Under the Outdoor Advertising Act, 'advertisements using means of transportation' include 'panel-attached type,' which displays letters or figures on panels made of acrylic or similar materials and attaches them, and 'direct display type,' which directly paints letters or figures with paint. The courts ruled that Mr. A's advertisement did not fall under either category.
The first trial court judged, "Considering the wording, system, legislative intent, and purpose of the Outdoor Advertising Act and its Enforcement Decree comprehensively, interpreting that advertisements using stickers are included in reportable advertisements using means of transportation is an excessive extension or analogy beyond the logical meaning of the wording," deeming such interpretation inappropriate.
The Enforcement Decree of the Outdoor Advertising Act defines 'advertisements using means of transportation' as advertisements that display letters or figures on panels made of acrylic, metal, digital displays, etc., attached to the exterior of vehicles, or directly painted with paint.
The court explained, "According to the Standard Korean Language Dictionary by the National Institute of the Korean Language, a 'panel' refers to a piece of wood or metal used for carving or printing pictures or letters, or a flat, wide piece of wood. Therefore, the 'panel' defined in the Outdoor Advertising Act reasonably refers to materials made of acrylic, metal, or at least similar or equivalent materials. It is difficult to consider any material or form that can display letters or figures as falling under 'advertisements using means of transportation' regulated by the Act."
It further stated, "However, stickers are special paper coated with adhesive, differing in form and nature from materials like acrylic or metal."
The court added, "Even if there is a need to punish the act of attaching unreported sticker advertisements, expanding the scope of punishment beyond the ordinary meaning of the wording to resolve legislative deficiencies is not a desirable approach."
Since stickers are special adhesive-coated paper and not panels, and the paint was not directly applied to the vehicle, the court concluded that punishment under current laws is difficult.
The second trial court's judgment was the same as the first trial's.
However, the Supreme Court's judgment differed.
The Supreme Court held that while advertising stickers do not fall under the 'panel' category, they may be considered advertisements directly painted with paint on the vehicle exterior.
The court stated, "Among 'advertisements using means of transportation' under Article 3, Item 13 of the former Enforcement Decree of the Outdoor Advertising Act, 'advertisements directly painted with letters or figures on the exterior of means of transportation' include cases where letters or figures are expressed with paint on special material paper such as advertising stickers and then displayed or attached to the means of transportation."
The court reasoned, "The Enforcement Decree defines direct display type advertisements using means of transportation as 'directly painting letters or figures with paint on the exterior of means of transportation,' but does not specify 'painting with paint' exclusively. Therefore, it cannot be limited to cases where paint is directly applied to the vehicle exterior."
Since the wording of the Enforcement Decree states 'displayed' rather than 'painted' directly on the vehicle exterior, cases where letters or figures are displayed by painting on special material paper such as stickers and then attaching them to the exterior of means of transportation, broadly interpreted as 'using paint,' may also fall under direct display type advertisements using means of transportation.
The court pointed out, "Even if the advertising sticker in this case does not fall under the panel-attached type, if it corresponds to the direct display type, it can be considered an advertisement using means of transportation subject to reporting. Therefore, the lower court should have further examined whether the advertising sticker in this case qualifies as a direct display type advertisement using means of transportation."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
