The Supreme Court recognizes that if there is a possibility of propagating both defamation and insult, it is public. Whether or not a conversation in mobile or internet group chat rooms where only two or only a few participants are affected is a libel, it is also important whether the publicity is recognized by the possibility of propagation.

The theory of propagation is still a meaningful theory. This is because, in order for publicity to be recognized, an indefinite or large number of people must not actually exist in a crime scene. In addition, defamation or insult by writing on the internet or mobile are far more dominant compared to defamation or insult by speech, and the application of the theory of propagation is beneficial. In the case of defamation or insulting an unspecified person, admitting the theory of propagation does not lead to unreasonable results when compared with the recognition of publicity by only a minority. In the case of insults, it is possible to spread the expression in a way that can not just be a mere contemptuous expression but also deteriorate the external evaluation of the victim.

The theory of propagation that has been firmly supported by decades of decades has been criticized for freedom of expression, but it is not inevitably wrong. Because it can be relieved in accordance with Article 310 and Article 20 of the Criminal Code for matters that may unduly undermine freedom of expression.

[대상판결 1] 대법원 2008. 2. 14. 선고 2007도8155 판결
 [연 구]
  Ⅰ. 뒷담화는 처벌되어야 하는가
   1. 사안의 개요
   2. 문제의 제기
  Ⅱ. 공연성 요건은 왜 필요한가
   1. 공연성의 의의
   2. 공연성과 보호법익의 관계
  Ⅲ. 전파가능성 이론은 타당한가
   1. 전파가능성 이론의 의의
   2. 전파될 가능성이 있는 사실
   3. 전파가능성 이론의 타당성
  Ⅳ. 대상판결 사안의 검토
   1. 대상판결 1
   2. 대상판결 2
  Ⅴ. 그래도 실패한 뒷담화는 처벌되어야 한다.
  [참고문헌]
  [Abstract]

• 한제희(Director of Human rights investigation division, Ministry of Justice(Public Prosecutor)) | Han, Je–Hee