C) Need of Legal and Policy Efforts to Eradicate Hate Speeches Articles 19 and 20 of the UN ICCPR stipulate freedom of expression and ‘prohibition of propaganda for war and violence,’ respectively. Moreover, the exercise of freedom of expression is accompanied by special obligations and responsibilities, and may be restricted if necessary according to the law for ‘① respect of the rights or reputations of others, and ② protection of national security or of public order, or of public health or morals.’ Several foreign countries, including Germany, Canada, Japan, and the United Kingdom, also regulate various types of hate speech by law.509) In light of the classification method of ARTICLE 19, international human rights organization, reviewed above, public contempt, insult, and threat to social minorities or ‘incitement to hatred’510) are a type that must be prohibited. Given that this type of hate speech has a high risk of causing real harm, there is relatively little controversy related to its criminalization. On the other hand, in the case of expressions corresponding to harassing the social minorities, it is necessary to consider resolving the problematic situation through corrective recommendations, orders, or mediation, even if they are not subjected to criminal punishment. For this, enactment of the Anti-Discrimination Act, which aims to specify the right of equality under the Constitution and achieve substantive equality, is an effective legislation, noting that the fundamental cause and ultimate effect of hate speech is social and institutional discrimination against a specific group. There is a lot of ambiguity with the components of criminal punishment, but if it is regulated by the Anti-Discrimination Act, these problems can be supplemented to a large extent. The fact that hate speech has increased in the online communities after specific remarks were made by candidates and politicians in the 2022 election process suggests that the influence of hate speech or the degree of its harm may vary depending on the position of the 509) NHRCK Human Rights Status Survey Report, Hate Speech Status Survey and Study on Regulation, 2016. 510) Kanbara, Hajime, according to ‘No Hate Speech,’ among the expressions corresponding to 'incitement to hatred,' among the remarks of the protesters at the Jae-Teuk Assembly, "Getting rid of Koreans is like extermination of pests," "Kill, kill, Koreans," "Kill both good Koreans and bad Koreans," "Scourge the cockroaches Koreans. Let's do it!” “Fuck the Koreans!” “If you see a Korean, you can throw stones and rape a Korean woman.” These expressions openly reveal discrimination and hostility against the target group, and at the same time incite the audience to practice discrimination and violence. 210