Ⅰ. Guaranteeing the Fundamental Human Freedoms: 2. Freedom of Expression stated that “if a crime of contempt for one’s superior is applied to the president, who is both a constitutional institution and a politician, to even purely private conversation, it causes excessive restrictions on the freedom of expression guaranteed by the Constitution.” Article 311 of the Criminal Act provides penalty for publicly insulting another. From 2000s, the distribution of false information online and malicious comments have become social issues, and the [Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection’ was amended to more severely penalize insult or defamation using the internet. The Supreme Court determined that ‘contempt’ is established when damaging an external honor by making an abstract decision or contemptuous expressions that can reduce the social assessment of a person.41) However, contempt became the topic of a dispute for a long time for decreasing the freedom of expression and unfit with the principles of democracy, and to decriminalize these.42) In fact, past presidents and high government officials have filed charges or lawsuits for defamation or contempt for expressions made by the people.43) The contempt charges under the Criminal Act have continuously been raised as violating the people’s freedom of expression, and the investigation on the ‘insulting expression of the president’ has once again ignited a discussion surrounding the decriminalization of contempt. 41) Supreme Court, Nov. 28, 2003, Sentence 2003Do3972 Decision; Supreme Court, Oct. 30, 2018, Sentence 2014Da61654 Decision 42) Segye Ilbo, “How far the freedom of expression can be valid... reignition of the discussion on the abolition of contempt” May 14, 2018 43) PSPD, “(Issue Report) Status and Countermeasures on Lawsuits to Keep the People from Making Their Voices Heard, May 22, 2013. 51