Adults who were initially given suspended sentences or fines for proposing conditional meetings to minors and engaging in sexual relations have now been isolated from society after receiving actual prison terms in the second trial. Although the sentences did not reach the 15 to 20 years in prison requested by the prosecution, the court handed down actual prison terms, deeming it a severe crime that damaged the value of protecting the rights of children and adolescents.
The Chuncheon branch of the Seoul High Court’s Criminal Division 1 (Presiding Judge Jihyun Min) overturned the original sentence of three years in prison with a four-year probation for one of the defendants who was charged with rape of a minor and violation of the Youth Protection Act. The judge sentenced him to four years in prison.
The court overturned the original judgments and sentenced four other defendants in their 30s, previously given one to two years in prison with two to three years of probation, to one to three years in jail.
One defendant in his 20s, who had been fined KRW 10 million (USD 8,500) for soliciting prostitution in the first trial, was sentenced to one year in prison. However, the execution of the sentence was suspended for two years.
The court arrested the five defendants who were sentenced to actual prison terms.
The court pointed out that sexual crimes against children and adolescents who have not yet formed their sexual values continue unabated. “These crimes occur widely based on the easily accessible internet and mobile environment. They are crimes that eat away at our society, damaging the value of protecting the rights of children and adolescents that our society wants to protect,” the court said. The court criticized the defendants, saying, “The defendants committed crimes such as intercourse or indecent acts, prostitution or soliciting prostitution against victims who were only in the sixth grade of elementary school, so the nature of the crime itself is bad and highly reprehensible.”
The court ruled that even if the parents of one of the victims agreed or made a criminal deposit, “it is not appropriate to consider it as an active mitigating factor like an adult,” and “it is difficult to see that the victim child truly understands the meaning of not wanting punishment and agrees to it.”
The defendants were brought to trial on charges of forced molestation or intercourse against two teenagers who were only elementary school students. They were students who had not reached the age of sexual consent. The defendants committed crimes after searching for conditional meeting targets on social media without knowing each other. They were investigated for approaching the victim students with the intention of prostitution, saying things like “I will give you money” and “I will buy you a game console.” Among them, there was one civil servant who was dismissed after the incident. The prosecution requested the court impose a severe sentence, as the children affected appeared young. Additionally, based on their conversations, the nature of the crime was deemed severe.
The prosecution requested a 20-year prison term for a defendant in his 30s, who committed the most rape offenses four times. Other defendants were close to the maximum legal punishment of 10 to 15 years in prison. However, the defendant, who was only charged with soliciting prostitution, requested a three-year prison term. During the last sentencing trial, he emphasized, “Even if the crime was committed with consent, they agreed to stay away from children that are under 13 years old,” and “Please see it as a human rights violation crime, not a sex crime.”
The victim’s lawyer argued, “80% of the verdicts on sexual crimes with minors have traditionally sentenced probation. No matter how high the legal punishment is, the effort to punish severely will be in vain if a corresponding punishment is not handed down. I hope this case will break the tradition and take a step forward in protecting children.”