• Venture DIGEST
• /
• s.135
• /
• pp.38-39
• /
• 2009

지난 호에는 부정적인 언론사 오보의 경우에 명예훼손의 판단기준은 어떠하며 피해자들에게 어떤 권리와 절차가 있는지를 살펴보았다. 요약하면 공익적이지 못한 보도(진실 여부와 상관없이), 공익적이지만 진실하지 못한 보도, 공익적이지만 언론의 주의의무(상당성)를 다하지 못한 보도는 손해배상책임을 지는 불법적 보도이며, 손해배상 정정보도 등 보도로 인한 피해 구제를 법원보다 간편하고 신속하게 받을 수 있는 기관으로 언론중재위원회(이하 중재위)가 있다는 것이다. 이번 호에는 이어서 포털 뉴스 및 근거 없는 게시글에 대해서 대응하는 방법과 최근에 나온 판례에 대해 설명하고자 한다.

• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.34
• /
• pp.161-195
• /
• 2006

Standing to sue has become one of the most important and controversial issues in suits between the press and the victims injured by the press reports. Even thought Korean law was patterned after the European legal system, there is no denying that the Korean Constitution was influenced by that of the United States. The judicial system was also influenced by its counterpart in the United States. The doctrine of standing to sue has plagued the U.S. Supreme Court for several decades. The traditional test of standing in the federal courts was, at the beginning of the century, whether the interest asserted by the plaintiff amounted to a 'legal right', entitled to the protection of the common law. In recent years, the Supreme Court seems to have settled on a two-tiered method for determining whether a plaintiff has standing to sue in federal court. The first level of inquiry is the constitutional core, and the second is the judicially imposed prudential limitations. The purpose of this study is to find out the doctrine of standing in the legal proceedings caused by the press reports. The press needs to internally transform as well to prevent legal dispute, enforcing confirmation when collecting news materials and building up the device for pre-examining the news. The press is also requested to help sincerely the victim recover, realizing that they waste their reputation and credit not to mention a lot of time and monet during the legal dispute.

• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.76
• /
• pp.151-182
• /
• 2016

The right to be forgotten (RTBF) has been a population notion to address privacy issues associated with the digitalization of information and the dissemination of such information over the global digital network. In May 2014, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) laid down a landmark RTBF decision to grant individuals the right to be de-listed from search results. ECJ's RTBF decision sparked an increased interest in RTBF in South Korea. Academic and non-academic commentators have provided a mistaken or outstretched interpretation of RTBF in claiming that removal of news articles should be read into RTBF in Korean law. Moreover, the Press Arbitration Commission of Korea (PAC) has proposed revising the Press Arbitration Act (PAA) to allow the alleged victims of news reporting to request the deletion of news stories. This article examines the notion of RTBF from its origin to the latest development abroad and also critically explores Korean laws regulation freedom of expression to evaluate if Korea needs the proposed PAA revision.

• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.48
• /
• pp.5-24
• /
• 2009

This study is aimed to analyze the concept of media consumer and legal principles for consumer movements protection. Based on the concept and legal principles, this research is to review the characteristics of the advertisement boycott campaign. Article 124 of the Constitution prescribes that the state should guarantee the consumer protection movements. According to the Article 4 of the Framework Act on Consumer, consumers have the fundamental right to obtain proper compensation for damages sustained due to use of goods and etc. according to prompt and fair procedure. The type of boycott can be classified into two pattern on the basis of boycott's target or object. They are primary boycott and. secondary boycott. Consumer's boycott independent of primary or secondary, are under the protection of the consumer's right. Media consumers use scarce resources to satisfy their wants and needs to acquire news information and advertising information. Their resources are time and money. Therefore, ads boycott campaign or media boycott campaign is the primary boycott. Consumer's right should be guaranteed to the maximum. The Constitution and consumer protection law should protect the practice of consumer's right, especially consumer's boycott campaign.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.33 no.1
• /
• pp.227-260
• /
• 2018

Recently, as the use of drones increases, the risk of drone accidents and third-party property damage is also increasing. In Korea, due to the recent increase in drone use, accidents have been frequently reported in the media. The number of reports from citizens, and military and police calls regarding illegal or inappropriate drone use has also been increasing. Drone operators may be responsible for paying damages to third parties due to drone accidents, and are liable for paying settlements due to illegal video recording. Therefore, it is necessary to study the idea of providing drone insurance, which can mitigate the liability and risk caused by drone accidents. In the US, comprehensive housing insurance covers damages caused by recreational drones around the property. In the UK, when a drone accident occurs, the drone owner or operator bears strict liability. Also, in the UK, drone insurance joining obligation depends on the weight of the drones and their intended use. In Germany, in the event of personal or material damage, drone owner bears strict liability as long as their drone is registered as an aircraft. Germany also requires by law that all drone owners carry liability insurance. In Korea, insurance is required only for "ultra-light aircraft use businesses, airplane rental companies and leisure sports businesses," where the aircraft is "paid for according to the demand of others." Therefore, it can be difficult to file claims for third party damages caused by unmanned aerial vehicles in personal use. Foreign insurance companies are selling drone insurance that covers a variety of damages that can occur during drone accidents. Some insurance companies in Korea also have developed and sell drone insurance. However, the premiums are very high. In addition, drone insurance that addresses specific problems related to drone accidents is also lacking. In order for drone insurance to be viable, it is first necessary to reduce the insurance premiums or rates. In order to trim the excess cost of drone insurance premiums, drone flight data should be accessible to the insurance company, possibly provided by the drone pilot project. Finally, in order to facilitate claims by third parties, it is necessary to study how to establish specific policy language that addresses drone weight, location, and flight frequency.