The Supreme Court found former Yonsei University professor Ryu Seok-chun guilty of defaming the Korea Council for Justice and Remembrance for the Issue of Military Sexual Slavery by Japanese Army (Jeongdaehyup) and affirmed a fine of 2 million won. However, it ruled that he was not guilty of defaming the honor of the comfort women victims when he stated, "The Japanese military comfort women are similar to modern prostitution." This ruling is the same as those from the previous first and second trials.
On the 13th, the Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Chief Justice Oh Seok-jun) rejected appeals from both the prosecutor and Ryu in the defamation case and upheld the second trial's ruling of a 2 million won fine.
During a sociology lecture at Yonsei University on Sept. 19, 2019, Professor Ryu stated, "The comfort women are not directly harmed by Japan but are a type of prostitution industry." Additionally, in response to a student's question during the lecture, he said, "Jeongdaehyup trained comfort women to testify as if they were forcibly recruited by the Japanese military" and "Jeongdaehyup executives are members of the Unified Progressive Party and are linked to North Korea, following the North." He was indicted in October 2020 for defaming the honor of the comfort women and Jeongdaehyup.
The first trial court ruled that Ryu's comments regarding the comfort women victims did not constitute defamation. The court stated, "It is a general and abstract expression regarding the entire issue of Japanese military comfort women and could be seen as a personal opinion or evaluation, making it difficult to recognize it as a factual statement constituting defamation."
However, the first trial court determined that Ryu's statement, "Jeongdaehyup trained comfort women to testify as if they were forcibly recruited by the Japanese military," was defamatory. The court concluded that this was indeed a statement of false facts.
Following the second trial court's dismissal of both parties' appeals, the Supreme Court also confirmed the original judgment. The Supreme Court stated, "There is no error in violating the principles of logic and experiences, exceeding the limits of free appreciation of evidence, or misunderstanding the legal principles regarding the establishment of defamation."