South Korea's Supreme Court ruled that MBC cannot be definitively held liable for damages over its reporting on former Deputy Prime Minister Choi Kyung-hwan's alleged investment in Sillajen Inc.
The court found that while the broadcast contained false statements, the reporting served the public interest and MBC may have reasonably believed the allegations to be true.
According to legal sources on Tuesday, the Supreme Court's Second Division, presided over by Justice Oh Kyung-mi, overturned the appellate court's partial ruling in favor of Choi and remanded the case to the Seoul High Court.
In April 2020, MBC reported claims by Lee Chul, former CEO of Value Invest Korea (VIK), that Choi had invested 500 million won ($370,000) in Sillajen convertible bonds while serving as Minister of Strategy and Finance in 2014, with associates investing an additional 5 to 6 billion won.
Following the broadcast, Choi filed a 300 million won defamation lawsuit against MBC in May 2020, claiming the report contained false statements.
The lower courts ruled in Choi's favor, ordering MBC to pay 20 million won in damages. They determined the report constituted false statements and that MBC lacked reasonable grounds to believe the claims were true.
The Supreme Court reversed this decision. While agreeing the report contained false statements, the court found grounds for negating the illegality of the broadcast.
"The morality, integrity, and proper conduct of public officials must always be subject to public scrutiny and criticism," the court stated. "Such oversight and criticism should not be easily restricted unless it constitutes a malicious or grossly reckless attack on an individual public official that clearly lacks validity."
The court held that even when media coverage damages an individual's reputation, illegality may not apply if the matter concerns the public interest and there were reasonable grounds to believe the report was true. The court emphasized that media coverage scrutinizing public officials and government institutions warrants broad protection of press freedom.
The Supreme Court determined that even if MBC did not fully verify the allegations, it cannot be concluded that the broadcaster lacked reasonable grounds to believe the report was true. The court also noted that the broadcast did not present the allegations as established fact and included rebuttals from Choi's side, making it difficult to characterize the coverage as malicious or grossly reckless.