contrary, some argue that the concept of hate speech is not clear from the viewpoint of emphasizing freedom of expression, and that it is only a vague assumption that minority groups suffer damages accordingly, so there is no need for the state to intervene by recognizing it specifically.505) However, some also argue that if the method of regulation is not limited to criminal punishment, a more appropriate response to eradicate hate speech will be chosen, and it will be easier to reach a social consensus on this issue. The most powerful regulatory action of the state is to ban hate speech through criminal legislation and criminally punish those who make hate speeches. However, it is possible to change the foundation of hate speech, and preventive regulations, such as publicity campaigns or awareness-raising activities, various support for minorities, implementation of anti-discrimination policies and education in public (educational) institutions, and broadcast reviews, etc. It is important to appropriately use these regulatory methods selectively or together depending on the situation.506) ARTICLE 19, an international human rights organization, synthesized international human rights laws and presented four classifications of hate speeches based on the “severity of harm” and methods for limiting them accordingly.507) According to this, ① Direct and public incitement to genocide, ② advocacy of discriminatory hatred that amounts to discrimination, hostility, violence, etc. must be prohibited, and ③ expressions that include threats of violence, harassment, or attacks, even though it does not incite specific acts against social minorities, can be restricted if necessary by law. On the other hand, ④ it is desirable for the state to take legal and policy measures against prejudice underlying the hate speech rather than restricting the expression itself in the case of remarks that cause anger or displeasure and can be viewed as biased, if the ‘seriousness requirement’508) is not met. 505) See Hong, Seong-su, “Regulating hate speeches”, and Lee, Seung-hyeon, 『Constitutional Review of Hate Speeches』 506) NHRCK Human Rights Status Survey Report, Hate Speech Status Survey and Study on Regulation, 2016. 507) ARTICLE 19, ‘Hate Speech’ Explained A Toolkit, 2015 508) Criteria for context of expression, speaker, intent, content of expression, degree and scale of expression, likelihood and imminence of potential harm 209