Deals & Cases

Criminal Defense Litigation Mar-24-2025
  • Share

    1. URL

DR & AJU Requests for Formal Trial and Obtains Acquittal in Case where the Summary Order in Violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes (Obscene Acts by Means of Communication) is Issued

The victim filed a lawsuit against the defendant, her supervisor, on charges of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes (Obscene Acts by Means of Communication). The victim claimed that in August 2022, the defendant called her and suddenly made obscene sounds, resembling masturbation, for about 15 seconds. Shortly after, the victim informed her colleagues and her then-boyfriend about the defendant’s actions.


The prosecutor sought a summary order for the defendant’s actions, and a summary order imposing a fine of KRW 1 million was issued. The defendant objected to the order and requested a formal trial.

Evidence supporting the charges includes the victim’s statement, as well as the statements of her colleagues and then-boyfriend, who testified that they had heard about the victim’s account.

The defendant consistently argued that he called to check on the company’s work and never made any moaning sounds.

We represented the defendant (“Client”) in this case, highlighting that the call between Client and the victim lasted only one minute and 54 seconds.  Although the victim claimed Client usually stared at her legs and breasts, no one, according to her colleagues’ statements, witnessed such behavior. When the victim shared these allegations with colleagues, one of them suggested that the victim might have mistaken because Client often made rough breathing sounds due to his heavy weight. In addition, according to the victim’s accusation records, the victim had filed a lawsuit against a woman who, the victim claimed, committed an indecent act by compulsion in an elevator, but the case was dismissed with no charges, indicating that the victim tends to make a judgment about incidents that did not occur.

The court acquitted Client, determining that the statements of the victim and some witnesses alone were insufficient to prove the facts constituting the offense.