using the message board. Therefore, the Provision at Issue satisfies the least restrictive means test. The degree to which the fundamental right is limited by the Provision at Issue is not substantial in light of the following factors: that the use of message boards is not the only way for anonymous expression directed at Public Institutions; that Public Institutions cannot be considered to have a general statutory obligation to install and operate message boards; that the Provision at Issue limitedly applies to the message boards installed and operated by Public Institutions. In contrast, there is a significant public interest in fostering a sound internet culture by preventing verbal abuse, defamation, and distribution of illegal information on the message boards installed and operated by Public Institutions. Therefore, the Provision at Issue satisfies the balance of interests test. Accordingly, because the Provision at Issue is in compliance with the rule against excessive restriction, it does not infringe the freedom of anonymous expression of Complainant. Summary of Dissenting Opinion of Four Justices If data including verbal abuse, defamation, or illegal information are published on a message board, a number of actions can be taken, including deletion of the data by a message board administrator; issuance of an order requiring a message board administrator or operator to refuse, suspend, or restrict transmitting illegal information; and holding the user civilly or criminally liable for publishing the data in question. Through these means, it is possible to achieve the legislative purpose of fostering a sound internet culture. Depending on the objective or character of a message board installed and operated by Public Institutions, there may be occasions where freedom of anonymous expression needs to be limited, such as when a Public Institution runs a message board where complaints or petitions can be posted. In such cases, however, a statutory basis can - 193 -