South Korea seeks corrections under Press Arbitration Act after Supreme Court clears president

The South Korean presidential office says it will exercise its right to request follow-up reporting under the country’s Press Arbitration Act to address coverage that linked President Lee Jae-myung to organized crime. The move follows a Supreme Court ruling that found the earlier allegations to be false, and officials stress the aim is to correct the public record.

The allegations date to October 2021, before the 20th South Korean presidential election, when lawyer Jang Young-ha claimed that Lee Jae-myung, then Seongnam mayor, received 20 billion won in favors from an “international mafia” in return for business advantages. The claim, made in the run-up to the election, became a focal point of political discourse at the time.

Jang Young-ha was later convicted by the Supreme Court of spreading false information under the Public Official Election Act, with a sentence of one year in prison and a two-year suspended term. The ruling confirmed that the assertions about Lee Jae-myung were untrue, according to the Blue House briefing.

At a March 12 briefing, Lee Kyu-yeon, the Blue House senior secretary for public relations and communications, said the court’s ruling showed the allegations were baseless and that continuing to report on them unsettles the public. He emphasized that while press freedom remains a core democratic value, accountability also carries significant weight, and corrections are better late than never.

The Blue House did not identify which outlets it would seek corrections from. Lee Kyu-yeon said the government would invoke the post-publication reporting right for outlets that covered the allegations, with the aim of clarifying the facts and restoring public trust.

Article 17 of South Korea’s Press Arbitration Act allows a person who was accused in media coverage and later exonerated to request follow-up reporting within three months of learning the verdict. The requested follow-up is required to include explanations or clarifications to help restore the claimant’s honor.

President Yoon Suk Yeol weighed in separately on the matter on X (formerly Twitter), lamenting that outlets that covered the allegations did not publish corrective reporting after the Supreme Court’s ruling and noting a lack of post-verdict corrections or even factual reporting.

For U.S. readers, the episode highlights how South Korea regulates accuracy and corrections in political reporting, a topic of interest for partners and investors monitoring media freedom, political risk, and regulatory environments in a key U.S. ally. The case also underscores how defamation and misreporting concerns can shape public opinion in a country that hosts major U.S. military and economic interests.