Today, the internet as an indispensable part of our lives is a medium to be misused for committing crimes as well as to provide us infinite freedom of speech. Due to this both-sides, the internet has to be regulated based on its content for protecting youth from being exposed to illegal and harmful materials. However, content-based regulation, enforced by severe criminal penalties, has the constant potential to be a repressive force in the lives and thoughts of a free people. Moreover, it causes the infringement of adult's freedom of speech. Therefore, these factors should be considered in designing regulation plan of internet speech. At first, in the medium-specific analysis, the internet should be protected as with the highest level as printing medium. In addition, the internet has little legitimacy of content-based regulation because it can keep diversity without governmental intervention and strengthen user-control power. For this reason, the regulating forms of internet speech ought to be different from those of traditional media. It is suitable to the internet, autonomous regulation rather than public one and parallelism of legal and technical regulation. In drawing the limitations of internet content regulation, I used a method comparing the related legislation and court decisions of the United States and Korea. By synthesizing the courts’ decisions from two countries, I could draw the following limitations in content-based regulation of internet speech for youth protection : considering the internet’s specific character, following the doctrine of void for vagueness, respecting adults’ freedom of speech and intensifying parents' choice what to see and hear for their children. Finally, I’d like to make several proposals about the desirable internet content regulation in both legislative and institutional sides. Above all, I maintain to change the subjects of decision-making harmful materials to minors. In conclusion, I think the autonomous regulation by combinations of parents, internet users and internet industry is appropriate for solving the constitutional defects concerning internet content regulation.

Today, the internet as an indispensable part of our lives is a medium to be misused for committing crimes as well as to provide us infinite freedom of speech. Due to this both-sides, the internet has to be regulated based on its content for protecting youth from being exposed to illegal and harmful materials. However, content-based regulation, enforced by severe criminal penalties, has the constant potential to be a repressive force in the lives and thoughts of a free people. Moreover, it causes the infringement of adult's freedom of speech. Therefore, these factors should be considered in designing regulation plan of internet speech. At first, in the medium-specific analysis, the internet should be protected as with the highest level as printing medium. In addition, the internet has little legitimacy of content-based regulation because it can keep diversity without governmental intervention and strengthen user-control power. For this reason, the regulating forms of internet speech ought to be different from those of traditional media. It is suitable to the internet, autonomous regulation rather than public one and parallelism of legal and technical regulation. In drawing the limitations of internet content regulation, I used a method comparing the related legislation and court decisions of the United States and Korea. By synthesizing the courts’ decisions from two countries, I could draw the following limitations in content-based regulation of internet speech for youth protection : considering the internet’s specific character, following the doctrine of void for vagueness, respecting adults’ freedom of speech and intensifying parents' choice what to see and hear for their children. Finally, I’d like to make several proposals about the desirable internet content regulation in both legislative and institutional sides. Above all, I maintain to change the subjects of decision-making harmful materials to minors. In conclusion, I think the autonomous regulation by combinations of parents, internet users and internet industry is appropriate for solving the constitutional defects concerning internet content regulation.

Freedom of speech on the internet, content-based regulation, youth protection, medium-specific analysis, void for vagueness