In the U.S.A, punitive damages are awarded in the case of malicious tort by the defendant for defamation. However, if the plaintiff is a public figure, not only malice but also at least “actual malice” is required to claim damages, whether compensatory or punitive. On the other hand, if the plaintiff is a private person, a claim for compensatory damages can be claimed if the defendant"s malice or negligence is proved, and punitive damages can be claimed if there is malice or “actual malice.” On the other hand, a plaintiff who is a private person can claim compensatory damages if he/she proves the defendant’s malice or negligence, and can claim punitive damages if he/she proves the defendant’s malice or “actual malice.” In other words, even in the United States, which can be said to be the heaven of the press, punitive damages are recognized in cases of malicious defamation. In addition, punitive damages are recognized even if the plaintiff is a public figure, a public figure, or the matter is a public concern.
In Korea, the amendment bill to the 「Act On Press Arbitration And Remedies For Damage Caused By Press Reports」 intends to introduce a five-times compensation system for actual damages in cases of defamation due to false or manipulated reports with clear “malice or gross negligence.” Many papers and news outlets oppose the introduction of the 5-times compensation system, saying that introducing the 5-fold compensation system violates the principle of excessive prohibition. However, I do not think that the introduction of punitive damages is contrary to the principle of excessive prohibition. Rather, it is wrong to stipulate that there is no liability for punitive damages even if false or manipulated reports are made with clear "malice or gross negligence" for public figures or public matters within a certain range. It goes against the concept of justice to insist on the freedom of speech even when the press, which has lost self-control, commits repeated and malicious defamatory acts. Although there are currently several relief systems for defamatory media reports, there is a need to strengthen civil penalties for malicious false and fabricated reports and to prevent such wrongful acts.
Therefore, just as the punitive damages system has already been introduced in 20 Acts, the 「Act On Press Arbitration And Remedies For Damage Caused By Press Reports」 should also introduce it.