This was a Defamation matter concerning expressions posted online and on SNS that allegedly lowered a specific person's social standing. Whether the expressions at issue constituted assertions of fact or the spreading of false facts was in dispute, and the circumstances of posting, the manner of expression, the existence of public relevance and public interest, and the victim's social position and influence were all contested comprehensively. The core issue was whether the expressions went beyond mere expressions of emotion and amounted to criminally punishable Defamation.

In this case, DAEON's specialist attorney closely analyzed the nature of the expressions at issue from the earliest stage and established a strategy that clearly distinguished the boundary between expressions of opinion and assertions of fact. We comprehensively reviewed the full context of the posts, the level of the language, and the socially accepted meaning of the phrases used, and built a legal rebuttal centered on the elements of Defamation—specificity, publicity, and factual assertion. We also actively demonstrated whether the expressions concerned the public interest and whether they were justified as an exercise of the right to defend oneself, ensuring that no unlawfulness for Defamation would be found during the investigation and any trial. As a result, it was accepted that criminal liability could hardly be imposed in this matter, and a favorable outcome was secured for our client.