Hello, this is Cheongchul Law Firm.

"I only wrote the truth, and now the police have called me." This is a surprisingly common enquiry. Online reviews are a legitimate consumer right, but depending on how they are worded and how well founded the facts are, they can turn into a criminal case. For business owners, the mirror-image question is how to respond to baseless one-star attacks. This article sets out which reviews are safe and where the risk begins.

[Contents]

1. Three offences that apply to reviews — defamation, insult, obstruction of business

2. Reviews unlikely to cause problems

3. Reviews to be careful with — when criticism becomes a personal attack

4. Five kinds of review most likely to draw a police call

5. What decides liability — "intent to defame" versus "public interest"

6. Three things to remember before posting

1. Three offences that apply to reviews — defamation, insult, obstruction of business

Three provisions are typically in play when an online review becomes contentious.

1. Online defamation — Article 70 of the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilisation and Information Protection. Disclosing facts through an information network with intent to defame carries up to three years' imprisonment or a fine of up to KRW 30 million; if the facts are false, up to seven years or KRW 50 million. Internet posts therefore attract heavier penalties than offline defamation under Article 307 of the Criminal Act.

2. Insult — Article 311 of the Criminal Act. Expressing contempt without asserting any specific fact, punishable by up to one year's imprisonment or a fine of up to KRW 2 million.

3. Obstruction of business — Article 314 of the Criminal Act. Spreading false information or using deception to obstruct another's business, punishable by up to five years' imprisonment or a fine of up to KRW 15 million.

The key point is that "but it's true" is not a complete answer. Defamation can be established even where the statement is factually accurate; falsity simply increases the penalty.

2. Reviews unlikely to cause problems

The following generally carry little criminal risk.

1. A star rating alone — no specific factual assertion and no contemptuous expression.

2. An account of your own experience after actually using the service — subjective impressions such as "the food was not good" or "the staff were unfriendly".

3. Verifiable objective facts — such as actually having waited far beyond the booked time.

"Low risk" is not the same as no risk. The same content can be assessed differently depending on repetition, use of multiple accounts and the intensity of the language.

3. Reviews to be careful with — when criticism becomes a personal attack

Describing an experience is one thing; labelling the other party is another. Expressions such as the following may amount to defamation or insult depending on their intensity:

1. "A clinic that only cares about money"

2. "An incompetent director ruined my hair"

These look like service reviews but function as categorical denials of the other party's character or professional competence. The same complaint framed as a specific account — "the result differed from what I had asked for, and my request for a correction was refused" — carries far less risk.

4. Five kinds of review most likely to draw a police call

1. Stating unverified matters as fact — writing that a business "uses expired ingredients" without having seen it. If false, the penalty is aggravated and obstruction of business may also arise.

2. Asserting criminal conduct — labels such as "a scam operator". Where such posts appear only immediately after a dispute, the legitimacy of the purpose is hard to establish.

3. Naming staff or posting their photographs — this goes beyond identifying the target of criticism and exposes an individual, widening the scope for dispute.

4. Repeat posting from multiple accounts — switching accounts to post the same content is strong evidence that the purpose is to harm rather than to inform.

5. Abuse and personal attacks — demeaning someone's appearance or character can constitute insult even without any factual assertion.

5. What decides liability — "intent to defame" versus "public interest"

Online defamation requires "intent to defame", and the Korean Supreme Court has consistently held that such intent is negated where the posting serves the public interest.

In a case concerning an online review of a postnatal care centre, the Court held that a consumer sharing their own experience of a service with other consumers may be regarded as serving the public interest (Supreme Court Decision 2012Do10392, 29 November 2012). That is the doctrinal basis on which consumer reviews are, in principle, protected.

Conversely, intent to defame becomes far easier to establish where:

1. the poster never used the service, or barely did;

2. the posts appear in a concentrated burst right after a refund or compensation demand was refused;

3. the same content is posted repeatedly across platforms and accounts; or

4. the content consists largely of personal attacks unrelated to the service.

Defamation is also an offence not prosecutable against the victim's express wishes, so removing the posts early and reaching a settlement can end the case. Insult requires a formal complaint by the victim. Early action therefore matters a great deal.

6. Three things to remember before posting

1. Write about facts you experienced yourself.

2. Avoid categorical labels.

3. Record the specific situation rather than the emotion.

Whether positive or negative, the review the law protects is one that is grounded in evidence.

Talk to Cheongchul Law Firm about malicious reviews and defamation complaints

In review disputes, timing decides the outcome for both sides. For a poster, tidying the posts and attempting settlement before a complaint is filed matters; for a business, requesting takedown or temporary measures and preserving evidence matters.

Cheongchul Law Firm handles online disputes end to end — filing and defending complaints for online defamation, insult and obstruction of business, requesting post deletion and temporary measures, and pursuing damages. If you have been contacted by the police over a review, or your business is suffering from malicious reviews, please contact us through our consultation booking page.

This article is general legal information, not legal advice on a specific matter. Whether defamation or insult is established depends on the wording, the overall context and the circumstances and purpose of the posting. Please consult a lawyer.