Last Culture Committee’s Legislative Review Committee in January.
Steam was mentioned in the so-called agenda of the legal regulation of probability items.
The steam, which has been breathtaking for the purpose of disclosing the probability, is a problem that is not related to the probability disclosure.

The proposal to disclose the information of the probability-type item is to strengthen the obligations of the game law, Article 33, and the obligation to mark the game.
In accordance with the penalty clause, you may be imprisoned or fined.
Of course, instead of criminal disposal, opinions were adjusted to prioritize the establishment of a step-by-step system such as municipal administration and corrective order, so that it did not lead to punishment.

Instead, if the step-by-step system is forced to set the company in the direction, or if there is a compulsory and punishment, it should be applied anywhere.
It is only natural that the disposal should not be light when the game company B is working by a family, and the game company C with frequent social contribution activities.

However, there is a question of whether it can be applied to overseas game companies that are directly distributed, especially games that are serviced by steam.
The autonomous regulation itself is not carried out, and how can the games directly contact with domestic users through Steam?

The so-called cope with this steam-type game service was mentioned.
As it cannot be neglected in monitoring and management, which includes punishment regulations, the Culture Commission also promised to persuade and consult steam to the domestic system.

Unlike private-led software review groups such as ESB in the United States, PEG in Europe, and HERO in Japan, Korea includes punishment regulations for game deliberation.
It is a steam that refuses to enter the autonomous regulations and domestic system, so it is in the gray zone of domestic law, as if it were a game without a deliberation.

If steam is organized according to domestic law and probability disclosure obligations, big changes are inevitable.
Even if Steam is designated as its own classification operator, the game cannot be classified through the game committee.
As the oak massage did, the game defined as a cruel or pornographic material is possible, as the oak massage did.
Whether the probability disclosure is regulated or not, the government cannot neglect it in the composition of the system itself.

All the contents of each case cannot be included in the bill, and this separate regulations are captured by the Presidential Decree that allows them to cope with the situation flexibly.
But would you like the phrase that it excludes a platform that is not classified in its own class, such as Steam, GOG, and ITCH.IO?
Or will it stop steam access like a pornography block page?

If Steam enters the system because of the disclosure of probability information, it is obvious that fans’ backlash will increase in the form of a variant of the steam domestic service.

The disclosure of the probability-type item information must be a very important first step for game users, even in the voices and opposing arguments of the voices and opposing arguments that pop out from the effects to the actual problems that are not actually regulated and the burden of companies.
Starting from a relatively small part of the implementation of information disclosure, it can be newly proposed by new legislation, enhancing the lack of user protection, and improving the problem.

This does not mean that you can only expect post-processing without proper preparation.


It is more difficult to erase and change the new legal texts.
The probability disclosure itself is more positive than the opposite.
In line with the expectations of gamers, it will be carefully revived and predicted to avoid other problems, and the detailed proposal for the appropriate proposal will be prepared to save the original purpose of the bill for the user.