On the first day of enforcement of the amended Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection, known as the "7·7 law," which imposes a self-deletion obligation on large online platforms for discriminatory and hateful expressions and false manipulated information, a video by YouTuber Kim Ou-joon was reportedly flagged. The reason was that a video containing content a court found to be false remains on YouTube.
Lee Dong-jae, a former Channel A reporter who serves as a guest editorial board member for the Maeil Shinmun, reported a video related to Kim Ou-joon on YouTube on the 7th. On the 8th, Lee disclosed this on his social media and said the reason for the report was that it was "a case that precisely matches the legislative intent of the amended network act." He argued that some videos on the Ddanzi Broadcasting channel dealing with the so-called "Channel A case" contain false information and remain posted, so removal is necessary.
The videos Lee took issue with are some of the content uploaded between April and October 2020 to "Dasboida" on YouTube's Ddanzi Broadcasting channel. In those videos, Kim reportedly mentioned several times the claim that Lee coerced and schemed to elicit testimony from Lee Cheol, former head of Value Investment Korea (VIK), who was then in custody, to the effect that money had been delivered to Yoo Si-min, former chair of the Roh Moo-hyun Foundation. The remarks were based on a post that Choi Kang-wook, then a proportional representation candidate for the Open Democratic Party, put on Facebook in April 2020.
The 7·7 law imposes an obligation on large platforms with an average of 1 million or more daily users to receive and process reports of illegal and false manipulated information. YouTube also adjusted its country-specific reporting procedures and channels accordingly. Lee cited as reasons for the report that the videos in question, which have surpassed 1 million views, contain false content and that harm continues to this day.
In July 2023, Judge Jang Min-kyung of the Seoul Eastern District Court's Civil Division 3 ruled in a damages suit Lee filed against Kim, ordering Kim to pay 5 million won and delay damages. During the trial, Kim's side denied intent, arguing that they merely relayed content that former lawmaker Choi had posted on social media believing it to be true, and that it amounted to an expression of personal opinion.
However, in the criminal case over the same matter, former lawmaker Choi had a fine of 10 million won finalized by the Supreme Court in July last year for defamation under the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection. The Supreme Court upheld the lower court's finding that the content Choi presented was false and that there was an intent to slander beyond a public-interest purpose. Lee, who had been indicted on an attempted coercion charge, was acquitted in January last year.
Separately from this report, Kim was indicted last year on charges of spreading false information about Lee, and prosecutors sought a one-year prison term. The first-instance verdict is scheduled for 2 p.m. on the 14th at the Seoul Northern District Court. Kim's attorney reportedly argued in the final statement that there was neither recognition that the facts were false nor an intent to slander.
A key issue in the process ahead is expected to be whether the amendment can apply to content posted before the 7·7 law took effect. Even if YouTube deems the reported videos subject to deletion, debate may continue over the scope of the law's application because the videos were uploaded before it took effect.
However, the Korea Media and Communications Commission said at a briefing on the 8th that the provision would not be applied retroactively to content posted before the amended Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection took effect.
In response, Lee argued it was problematic for the government agency, the Korea Media and Communications Commission (KMCC), to render an immediate determination as a court would, and countered that this report is not retroactive application but a challenge to the ongoing distribution of false information. He claimed that Kim continued to distribute the posts even though Kim recognized the content was false through the rulings related to himself and former lawmaker Choi Kang-wook.
Meanwhile, the Korea Media and Communications Commission (KMCC) designated eight companies the previous day as platforms subject to the 7·7 law regulations—Naver, Kakao, Nate Communications, DC Inside, Google, Meta, X, and TikTok—and announced related guidelines.