D&A secured a constitutional nonconformity ruling against a provision of the Act on Elections Entrusted by Public Organizations that prohibited the use of multimedia messages containing audio, images, or videos in cooperative head election campaigns.

The case concerned the constitutionality of a provision of the Act on Elections Entrusted by Public Organizations prohibiting the use of multimedia messages containing audio, images, or videos in text message-based election campaigns. The constitutional issue arose after Petitioner A and Applicant B, candidates in the nationwide simultaneous cooperative head elections, were indicted for sending multimedia messages containing images from election campaign materials to cooperative members during the campaign period.

The petitioners argued that the provision excessively infringed upon candidates’ freedom of expression and freedom of association, and filed a constitutional complaint and a request for constitutional review of the statute.

The key issue in the case was whether Article 28(2) of the Act on Elections Entrusted by Public Organizations, which prohibited the use of multimedia messages containing audio, images, or videos in text message-based election campaigns, constituted a reasonable restriction aimed at ensuring fair elections or excessively infringed upon candidates’ freedom of expression and freedom of association.

In response, D&A emphasized that a blanket ban on multimedia messaging solely on the grounds that it is more expensive than standard text messages constitutes an excessive restriction. In particular, the firm argued that uniformly banning multimedia messaging itself violates the principle of proportionality, given the existence of less restrictive alternatives such as limits on the number of transmissions. Furthermore, it persuasively maintained that, given the need to effectively communicate policies and campaign pledges to voters in cooperative head elections, campaign methods incorporating images or visual materials should be protected as modern means of expression. 

The Constitutional Court accepted D&A’s arguments and, in a 7-2 decision, held that a blanket ban on the use of multimedia messaging excessively restricts candidates’ freedom of expression and freedom of association, thereby violating the principle of proportionality. Accordingly, the Court issued a constitutional nonconformity ruling with respect to the relevant provision and ordered the legislature to amend the law by December 31, 2026.

This decision is significant in that it confirms that candidates’ freedom of expression and the use of modern campaign methods should be broadly protected even in cooperative head elections. It is also expected to serve as an important catalyst for broader discussions on reforming the cooperative election system as a whole, particularly alongside the expansion of digital campaign methods such as multimedia messaging.