Document type
Court Decision
Country
(1) This case concerns obscene materials. The defendants were employees of an Internet portal in charge of the portal’s “entertainment channel.” There were obscene cartoons on the cartoon section of the entertainment channel.
(2) The Supreme Court held the defendant liable for not deleting the cartoons and thus aiding the violation of Article 48-2 of the former Framework Act on Telecommunications (amended by Act No. 6360 on January 16, 2001) which punished distribution, sale, rental or exhibition of obscene materials on the Internet. The issue in this case was whether the defendants had a duty to delete the cartoons. The court affirmed that such duty existed and that the defendants aided the crime by nonfeasance.
Country
Year
2006
Topic, claim, or defense
Obscenity or Morality
Document type
Court Decision
Issuing entity
Appellate Domestic Court
Type of service provider
General or Non-Specified
OSP obligation considered
Block or Remove
Type of law
Criminal
General effect on immunity
Weakens Immunity
General intermediary liability model
Takedown/Act Upon Knowledge (Includes Notice and Takedown)