Free Speech Protection in Korea vs. the United States: How Public Insults Can Be Criminal in Korea and lead to deporation, but Protected Speech in the U.S.

Freedom of expression is constitutionally protected in both South Korea and the United States, but the legal boundaries of protected speech differ sharply. One of the most striking differences lies in how each system treats offensive or degrading speech directed at individuals. A recent decision of the Changwon District Court (October 30, 2024; 2025GoJeong341) highlights this contrast.

In that case, verbal remarks protected under the U.S. First Amendment resulted in criminal liability for “insult” under Korean criminal law. For those in Korea on a visa, these types of Korean criminal convictions can lead to deportation.

The Crime of “Insult” in Korea

In July 2024, a woman in her 20s publicly stated to a 70-year-old parking attendant, in the presence of third parties, that her companion dog was “more expensive” than the attendant. The Korean court held that these remarks demeaned the victim’s human dignity and constituted criminal insult.

The Changwon District Court found the defendant guilty under Article 311 of the Korean Criminal Act, and imposed a criminal fine of KRW 1.5 million. The Korean court emphasized that:

• The remarks were publicly made, and
• The remarks involved degrading comparisons that undermined human dignity.

Although the incident later escalated into physical altercations involving other parties (each separately fined for assault), the conviction for insult was based solely on speech, and the assaults led to less of a fine than the insult.

Korean Criminal Act Article 311

Korean Criminal Act, Article 311 (Insult)

“A person who publicly insults another shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than one year or by a fine not exceeding ten million won.”

Korean courts interpret freedom of expression under Article 21 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea, which guarantees freedom of speech and press, in harmony with the constitutional principle of human dignity under Article 10.

The Korean Constitutional Court has repeatedly held that freedom of expression may be restricted where necessary to protect personal honor and dignity, provided the restriction is proportionate (see, e.g., Constitutional Court Decision 2013Hun-Ba195).

United States: Insults and the First Amendment

In the United States, verbal insults, even crude or degrading ones, are generally protected speech under the First Amendment. The U.S. government may not impose criminal punishment merely because speech is offensive or disrespectful.

Key U.S. Supreme Court precedents include:

• Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971)
  → “One man’s vulgarity is another’s lyric”; offensive speech is protected.
• Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989)
  → Even deeply offensive expressions may not be criminalized based on content.

Only limited categories of speech fall outside First Amendment protection:

• True threats (Virginia v. Black, 538 U.S. 343 (2003))
• Incitement to imminent lawless action (Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969))
• Fighting words (Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942))

Notably, the “fighting words” doctrine has been interpreted extremely narrowly in modern jurisprudence and is rarely applied. Courts are reluctant to criminalize insults absent a clear and immediate risk of violence.

Korea vs. the United States

Practical Implications for Foreigners in Korea

For foreign nationals, expatriates, and foreign businesses operating in Korea, this distinction has practical consequences:

• Statements considered mere rudeness in the U.S. may constitute criminal conduct in Korea, which could lead to deportation, loss of employment, and loss of a visa.
• Public disputes with service workers or employees can result in criminal complaints.
• Intent to insult or harm reputation is not required under Korean law.

Conclusion

The Changwon District Court decision serves as a clear reminder that freedom of speech is not defined uniformly across jurisdictions. While U.S. law protects even harsh and degrading speech as a necessary cost of free expression, Korean law permits criminal sanctions to protect human dignity and social order.

. . .

IPG Legal

IPG Legal is widely recognized as a leading law firm in Korea for criminal defense matters, particularly in cases involving foreign nationals, cross-border issues, and complex fact patterns arising from everyday disputes as well as high-stakes investigations. The IPG Legal Law Firm’s criminal defense practice is consistently regarded as top-tier for its depth of experience, bilingual advocacy, and ability to navigate both Korean procedural law and the expectations of international clients, earning the firm a strong reputation as a trusted and highly rated criminal defense practice in Korea.

by Sean Hayes
Sean Hayes is co-chair of the Korea Practice Team at IPG Legal. Sean is the first non-Korean attorney to have worked for the Korean court system (Constitutional Court of Korea) and one of the first non-Koreans to be a regular member of a Korean law faculty. Sean is ranked, for Korea, as one of the only non-Korean lawyers as a Top Attorney working in Korea.

Sean’s profile may be found at: Sean C. Hayes. For a consultation with an attorney in Korea: please schedule a call with an English-speaking lawyer in Korea.