본문 바로가기
  • Home

Constitutional Limits on Regulation of Internet and SNS Election Campaigns - Focusing on Article 82-8 of the Public Official Election Act -

  • Legal Theory & Practice Review
  • Abbr : LTPR
  • 2026, 14(2), pp.271~289
  • Publisher : The Korea Society for Legal Theory and Practice Inc.
  • Research Area : Social Science > Law
  • Received : May 5, 2026
  • Accepted : May 23, 2026
  • Published : May 31, 2026

Seo Jeong-mi 1

1안양대학교

Accredited

ABSTRACT

On On January 29, 2024, the Public Official Election Act of Korea was amended to introduce Article 82-8, which regulates election campaigning using so-called “deepfake” content generated or manipulated through artificial intelligence technologies. The provision prohibits the production, editing, distribution, screening, or posting of such content during the 90-day period prior to election day, and imposes criminal penalties of up to seven years’ imprisonment or fines ranging from 10 million to 50 million KRW for violations. This legislative measure aims to protect the fairness of elections from the risks posed by disinformation and deceptive campaign content arising from the rapid proliferation of generative AI technologies. However, Article 82-8 raises fundamental constitutional concerns, particularly in relation to the freedom of political expression guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. First, the statutory requirement that the content be “difficult to distinguish from reality” is excessively vague and technologically contingent, thereby risking a violation of the principle of clarity derived from the legality principle in criminal law. Second, the broad prohibition covering a 90-day pre-election period may fail to satisfy the requirement of minimal infringement under the proportionality principle. Third, the combination of severe criminal sanctions and indeterminate statutory elements may produce a chilling effect, discouraging even lawful forms of political satire and parody. This study briefly examines comparative legislative approaches, including the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act and relevant state-level regulations in the United States, and finds that the prevailing international standard emphasizes disclosure-based regulation rather than outright prohibition. Accordingly, this paper proposes several legislative reforms: abolishing the general prohibition under Article 82-8(1) and restructuring the provision around disclosure obligations under Article 82-8(2), introducing statutory exceptions for journalism, academic research, artistic expression, and satire, and incorporating the public figure doctrine to ensure adequate protection of political expression.

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2024 are currently being built.