🚨 Contempt of National Assembly

Today Korean Social News for Beginners | 2026.01.02

0️⃣ Legal Boundaries Between Hearing Order and Freedom of Expression

📌 Raising Voice and Banging Desk at National Assembly Hearing...Coupang CEO Unlikely to Face Punishment for Contempt

💬 Harold Rogers, interim CEO of Coupang Korea, caused controversy during a National Assembly hearing by raising his voice and banging on the desk with emotional behavior. Some lawmakers mentioned the possibility of applying the contempt of National Assembly law, but analysis shows actual punishment is unlikely under the current legal system. While the National Assembly Act and the Act on Testimony and Appraisal at the National Assembly require witnesses to appear and testify, provisions for punishing testimony attitude alone are limited. During this hearing, disputes arose over the use of interpretation devices, along with statements about responses to personal information leak incidents. The National Intelligence Service requested prosecution for perjury, claiming Coupang's statements were false, but proving perjury requires proving intentional false statements. Experts point out that because contempt of the National Assembly can conflict with freedom of expression, courts have applied strict standards, and actual conviction cases are extremely rare.

💡 Summary

• Contempt of National Assembly is a crime that applies when witnesses undermine the authority of the Assembly through assault, threats, or insults.
• Due to potential conflicts with freedom of expression, actual punishment cases are very limited.
• Emotional attitude alone is difficult to punish, and perjury requires proof of intent.

1️⃣ Definition

Contempt of National Assembly refers to a crime that applies when witnesses or reference persons who appear at National Assembly hearings or investigations undermine the authority of the National Assembly through assault, threats, or insulting behavior. Based on Article 14 of the Act on Testimony and Appraisal at the National Assembly, its purpose is to protect the order and authority of the National Assembly and maintain fairness in National Assembly activities.

This law stipulates imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to 10 million won if witnesses assault or threaten at the National Assembly, or engage in behavior that insults the National Assembly by social standards. However, simply being rude or showing unpleasant attitude is difficult to punish; the level must seriously undermine the authority of the National Assembly.

💡 Why is this important?

• For the National Assembly's investigation and audit authority to work effectively, sincere cooperation from witnesses is needed.
• Maintaining order and protecting the authority of the National Assembly is fundamental to democratic decision-making.
• However, careful application of the law is required as it can conflict with freedom of expression.
• Unclear punishment standards can lead to political controversy.

2️⃣ Current Status and Issues of Contempt of National Assembly

📕 Background and Purpose of the Act on Testimony and Appraisal

• It was enacted to effectively guarantee the National Assembly's investigation and audit authority. Key contents are as follows:

  • The National Assembly has the authority to audit and investigate state affairs according to the Constitution.
  • It can summon witnesses and reference persons to hear testimony and receive necessary documents.
  • It clearly stipulates witnesses' obligation to appear, take oath, and grounds for refusing testimony.
  • It ensures the effectiveness of the system by including punishment provisions for perjury, refusal to testify, and contempt of the National Assembly.

• Contempt of National Assembly is a mechanism to protect Assembly order and authority. Main purposes are as follows:

  • Prevents witnesses from disrupting National Assembly activities through assault or threats.
  • Sanctions acts that undermine the authority of the National Assembly through insulting behavior.
  • Maintains order so National Assembly hearings can proceed smoothly.
  • Protects the authority of public institutions to preserve democratic functions.

📕 High Threshold for Law Application

• Actual punishment cases are very rare. Key status is as follows:

  • While there have been cases where contempt of National Assembly was applied, actual guilty verdicts are extremely rare.
  • Courts have applied strict interpretation standards due to concerns about conflicts with freedom of expression.
  • Simply raising one's voice or showing unpleasant attitude is not punished.
  • Clear assault or threats, or repeated and serious insults must be recognized.

• Determining the elements is difficult. Key problems are as follows:

  • The standard for 'insult' is subjective and can vary by situation.
  • Content, context, tone, and repetitiveness of statements must be comprehensively considered.
  • Strict evidence is needed to determine if something constitutes insult by social standards.
  • It is often difficult to distinguish between emotional reactions and intentional insults.

📕 Conflict with Freedom of Expression

• There are concerns that even political criticism and opinion expression could be punished. Key issues are as follows:

  • Contempt of National Assembly can target speech in the public sphere for punishment.
  • Critical statements about politicians or public officials may be suppressed.
  • Careful balance is needed as freedom of expression is a core value of democracy.
  • Some argue that excessive punishment could actually harm the authority of the National Assembly.

• Careful attitude from investigative agencies and courts is needed. Key directions are as follows:

  • Political opinions or criticism should not lead to punishment.
  • The law should be applied only to clear assault/threats or serious insults.
  • Witnesses' right to defense and freedom of expression must be sufficiently guaranteed.
  • Consistency and predictability in law application is important.

💡 Key Issues of Contempt of National Assembly

1. High threshold for application: Actual guilty verdict cases are very rare with strict standards
2. Vague insult standards: Difficult to judge what constitutes insult with large subjective elements
3. Conflict with freedom of expression: Concerns about suppressing political criticism and opinion expression
4. Confusion with perjury: Attitude problems and false statement problems must be distinguished
5. Political controversy: Risk of law application becoming politicized due to differences between parties

3️⃣ Reasonable Improvement Measures

✅ Establishing Clear Law Application Standards

• Elements must be specified. Key directions are as follows:

  • Standards must be established through precedents on what behavior constitutes insult.
  • Standards are needed to distinguish between simple emotional reactions and intentional insults.
  • While assault and threats are clear, judgment standards by case must be presented for insults.
  • Courts and investigative agencies should apply consistent interpretations.

• Balance with freedom of expression must be considered. Key tasks are as follows:

  • Political criticism or opinion expression should be protected as much as possible.
  • An appropriate balance point must be found between protecting the authority of the National Assembly and freedom of expression.
  • Care must be taken to prevent chilling effects from excessive punishment.
  • Discussion in the public sphere must be freely guaranteed in democratic society.

✅ Alternatives for Maintaining Hearing Order

• The chairperson's authority to proceed should be strengthened. Key measures are as follows:

  • The chairperson should be able to immediately warn when witnesses show inappropriate attitude.
  • Immediate responses such as ejection should be possible for repeated violations of order.
  • Maintaining order at the hearing site should take priority before criminal punishment.
  • Prevention and on-site response are more effective than post-punishment.

• Witnesses should be clearly informed of procedures and obligations. Key directions are as follows:

  • Witnesses' rights and obligations should be fully explained before hearing attendance.
  • Legal responsibilities such as perjury and contempt of National Assembly should be notified in advance.
  • Fair interpretation procedures should be guaranteed when interpretation is needed.
  • Procedural guarantees are needed so witnesses can fully exercise their right to defense.

✅ Distinction from Perjury and Appropriate Application

• Attitude problems and false statement problems must be distinguished. Key tasks are as follows:

  • Contempt of National Assembly focuses on whether the authority of the Assembly was undermined.
  • Perjury focuses on whether statements different from facts were made intentionally.
  • The two should not be confused, and each element must be clearly judged.
  • Emotional attitude should not be treated as perjury.

• Strict proof is needed for perjury to be established. Key directions are as follows:

  • Even if there are statements different from objective facts, intent must be proven.
  • Memory errors or differences in perception are not perjury.
  • Extensive investigation of facts and related persons is needed.
  • According to the principle of presumption of innocence, punishment should not occur when in doubt.

4️⃣ Related Terms

🔎 Act on Testimony and Appraisal at the National Assembly

• This act supports the National Assembly's investigation and audit authority.
  • The Act on Testimony and Appraisal at the National Assembly, enacted in 1972, stipulates procedures and obligations for witness and reference person attendance, testimony, and document submission when the National Assembly conducts state audits or investigations. It is the legal basis for effectively guaranteeing the National Assembly's constitutional authority.
  • Main contents of the law include: First, witnesses and reference persons must respond to the National Assembly's summons. Second, witnesses must take an oath and testify truthfully according to conscience. Third, refusal to appear or testify without just cause can be punished. Fourth, there are punishment provisions for perjury, refusal to testify, and contempt of the National Assembly.
  • Contempt of National Assembly is stipulated in Article 14 of this law, stating that "if a witness or reference person assaults or threatens at the National Assembly or committee, or insults the National Assembly or committee," they can be punished with imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to 10 million won. However, actual application cases are rare, and courts have applied strict standards considering freedom of expression.

🔎 Perjury

• Perjury is a crime where a sworn witness intentionally makes false statements.
  • Perjury is a crime established when a witness sworn according to law intentionally makes statements different from facts. Based on Article 152 of the Criminal Act and Article 12 of the Act on Testimony and Appraisal at the National Assembly, it is punishable by imprisonment of up to 5 years or a fine of up to 10 million won. It is a system to protect the truthfulness of public procedures such as trials or National Assembly hearings.
  • Three requirements must be met for perjury to be established. First, an oath must have been taken according to law. Second, statements different from objective facts must have been made. Third, it must be proven that false statements were made intentionally. Simple memory errors or differences in perception are not perjury, and proving intent is key.
  • In this Coupang case, the National Intelligence Service requested prosecution for perjury, claiming statements about National Intelligence Service instructions during the personal information leak response were false. However, for perjury to be recognized, it must be proven that Coupang intentionally lied while knowing the facts. Comprehensive investigation of awareness at the time of statements, facts, and related evidence is needed, which can take time.

🔎 Freedom of Expression

• Freedom of expression is a core value of democracy.
  • Freedom of expression means the right to freely express one's thoughts and opinions through various methods such as speech, writing, publication, and art. Guaranteed in Article 21 of the Constitution, it is the basic foundation of democratic society. Particularly, freedom of political expression is essential for citizens to participate in the political process and monitor power.
  • Freedom of expression is not an absolute right but has certain limits. Expressions that infringe on others' honor or rights, or expressions that harm public morals or social ethics can be restricted. However, restrictions must be minimal and have clear legal basis. Restricting expressions with unclear standards can cause chilling effects.
  • Contempt of National Assembly and freedom of expression can conflict. While it is necessary to punish insulting behavior to protect the authority of the National Assembly, interpreting it too broadly can suppress even political criticism or opinion expression. For this reason, courts have strictly interpreted contempt of National Assembly, applying it only to clear assault/threats or serious insults. In democratic society, the balance between maximally guaranteeing freedom of expression while maintaining public order is important.

🔎 State Audit and State Investigation

• State audit and state investigation are the National Assembly's means of checking the executive branch.
  • State audit is the National Assembly's audit activity conducted regularly every year, examining the executive branch's work across state affairs. Based on Article 61 of the Constitution and the Act on State Audit and Investigation, it is conducted during the regular session in September every year. All central administrative agencies, local governments, and public institutions are subject.
  • State investigation is investigative activity conducted when the National Assembly deems it necessary for specific cases. Started by request of at least one-quarter of registered members, it reveals the truth about specific incidents or policies. While state audit is regular and comprehensive, state investigation is focused investigation on specific cases.
  • The National Assembly can request witness attendance, document submission, and on-site investigation for state audits or investigations. The Act on Testimony and Appraisal at the National Assembly has witnesses' obligations and punishment provisions to effectively guarantee this authority. Contempt of National Assembly is also a system to protect the authority of the National Assembly and maintain order in this process. The purpose is to substantially guarantee the National Assembly's function of checking the executive branch in the separation of powers system.

5️⃣ Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q: Will speaking emotionally at a hearing automatically result in punishment for contempt of National Assembly?

A: No, simply being emotional or rude is difficult to punish.

• For contempt of National Assembly to be established, it must go beyond simple rudeness or unpleasant attitude to recognize assault, threats, or insulting behavior that seriously undermines the authority of the National Assembly by social standards. Courts comprehensively judge the content, context, tone, and repetitiveness of statements, and have applied very strict standards.
• For example, raising one's voice or banging on a desk alone is difficult to punish. There must be clear assault or threats, or repeated and serious insulting statements. Also, considering conflicts with freedom of expression, political criticism or opinion expression is protected as much as possible. Cases of actually receiving guilty verdicts for contempt of National Assembly are very rare. At hearing sites, it is common for the chairperson to give warnings or take ejection measures.

Q: How are perjury and contempt of National Assembly different?

A: Perjury judges whether false statements were made, while contempt of National Assembly judges whether the authority of the Assembly was undermined.

• For perjury, the key is whether a sworn witness intentionally made statements different from facts. Even if there are statements different from objective facts, perjury cannot be punished without proven intent. Memory errors or differences in perception are not perjury. For perjury to be recognized, it must be proven that the witness intentionally lied while knowing the facts.
• On the other hand, contempt of National Assembly judges whether the witness's attitude or behavior undermined the authority of the Assembly, regardless of the truth of statements. Assault, threats, and insulting statements are subject. In the Coupang case, emotional attitude is an issue of contempt of National Assembly, while the truth of statements about personal information leaks is an issue of perjury. Since the two are separate crimes, each element must be clearly distinguished and judged.

Q: Are there arguments that contempt of National Assembly should be abolished?

A: There are discussions about abolition or revision due to concerns about infringing freedom of expression, but there are also opinions that it is necessary to maintain National Assembly order.

• Some argue that contempt of National Assembly should be abolished or its elements made stricter because it can excessively restrict freedom of expression. There are concerns it could suppress even political criticism or opinion expression, and it has low effectiveness with rare actual application cases. The argument is that discussion and criticism in the public sphere should be maximally guaranteed in democratic society.
• On the other hand, there are opinions that it is a necessary system to protect the authority of the National Assembly and maintain hearing order. The argument is that if clear assault, threats, or serious insults are left unchecked, National Assembly activities could be paralyzed. What's important is finding a balance between freedom of expression and maintaining National Assembly order. It is desirable to clarify law application standards, maximally guarantee freedom of expression, and apply it strictly only when necessary.

Table of Contents

• Go to Guide