전기통신기본법상 허위통신죄 규정의 연혁 및 의미

Abstract

The Crime of False communication on Framework Act of Telecommunications, generally known as ‘disseminaton of false information’, is criticized by many people because the clause in the act violates the principle of legality. They says if ‘false information’ itself be punished, then every expressions cannot be protected by freedom of expression. I think this opinions may be acceptable, but the clause is not aimed for dissemination of false information. From history of the clause, I conclude this clause dates from the Telecommunication Act in 1900 and the Radio Act in 1915. The old Acts were instituted by Japanese imperialism, then the clause has two categories of private interest and public interest. And the clause is necessary for protecting illegal use of telecommuncations facilities. For this reason, I think the meaning of ‘false communincation’ is not of ‘false information’ but of ‘illegal use of telecommunication’. If this clause is regarded as crime of ‘dissemination of false information’, it may be understood as repressing freedom of speech. But the crime of false communication is not interpretable as that meaning, instead as belief for safety and public concern of telecommunications include internet. Recently at the case of ‘Minerva’, the man indicted by violation of the clause of false communication on Framework Ac of Telecommunication was given a verdict of “not guilty”. This case shows the limits of application of the act.