"Political expression should be interpreted as 'freedom as the rule, prohibition as the exception'"
The court has ruled that the cancellation of sanctions against CBS is warranted after the broadcaster was penalized for mentioning suspicions regarding Kim Keon-hee's acceptance of luxury handbags and alleged stock price manipulation on air.
Kim Keon-hee, wife of former President Yoon Seok-youl, who is accused of violating the Capital Markets and Financial Investment Business Act, the Political Funds Act, and the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes (receiving bribes), is leaving the courtroom after the pre-arrest detention hearing at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul on August 12, 2025. Photo by Joint Press Corps
According to the legal community on October 9, the 6th Administrative Division of the Seoul Administrative Court (Presiding Judge Na Jin-yi) recently ruled in partial favor of the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by the CBS Foundation against the Korea Communications Commission, seeking to overturn the sanction measures.
In February last year, CBS's "Kim Hyun-jung's News Show" aired allegations concerning Kim Keon-hee's acceptance of luxury handbags and her involvement in the alleged stock price manipulation of Deutsche Motors. During the broadcast, a panelist's remarks were deemed to have violated election broadcasting review regulations, leading the Korea Communications Commission to issue a "warning" sanction against CBS. Although this was later reduced to a "caution" upon review, CBS proceeded to file a lawsuit against the decision.
The court stated, "The freedom of broadcasting guaranteed by the Constitution includes the independence of programming. Political expression should be interpreted as 'freedom as the rule, prohibition as the exception,'" siding with the plaintiff. The court further pointed out, "In a situation where the definition of 'election broadcast' under the Public Official Election Act is unclear, imposing uniform sanctions simply for addressing political issues infringes on press freedom. The state must refrain as much as possible from intervening in broadcast content to ensure that the essential role of broadcasting is not unfairly diminished."
The court also found, "The remarks in question were criticism of a public matter involving the spouse of the president and cannot be regarded as a broadcast directly related to an election," concluding, "Since there is no valid reason for the sanction, the measure is unlawful."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
