20. Case on the Unconstitutionality of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Promotion of Newspapers, Etc. Prescribing the Employment Requirements for an Online Newspaper [2015Hun-Ma1206, 2016Hun-Ma277 (consolidated), October 27, 2016] In this case, the Constitutional Court held that Article 2 Section 1 Item 1 Sub-Item (a), Sub-Items (c) and (d) of Article 4 Section 2 Item 3, and Article 2 of the Addenda of the ‘Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Promotion of Newspapers, Etc.’, which prescribe that online newspapers must have at least five regular employees consisting of reporters and editors; and that they must submit documents to verify compliance therewith, infringe upon the freedom of press of the complainants, who are online newspaper enterprisers, and thus violate the Constitution. The Court also held that the provision concerning online newspapers in Item 2 of Article 2 and Article 9 Section 1 of the ‘Act on the Promotion of Newspapers, Etc.’ which prescribe the definition and require registration of online newspapers, do not violate the Constitution. Background of the Case (1) Complainants 1 to 9 are online newspaper corporations. Complainants 10 to 18 are private owners of online newspapers. Complainant 19 is an online newspaper reporters’ association. Complainants 20 to 52 are executives or reporters working at online newspapers. Complainants 53 to 62 are online newspaper readers, and Complainant 63 and Complainant ○○○ are preparing to launch online newspapers. (2) The complainants filed a constitutional complaint, claiming that Item 2 of Article 2 and Article 9 Section 1 of the ‘Act on the Promotion of Newspapers, Etc.’, and Article 2 Section 1 Item 1 SubItem (a), Sub-Items (c) and (d) of Article 4 Section 2 Item 3 and Article - 203 -