Subscribe
E-Paper
 |
| If you hit back, don't expect Korea's self-defense law to excuse you. / Graphic by Cho Sang-won |
By Jung Min-ho
On Oct. 9, a stranger made an unprovoked attack on a man in his 30s. To protect himself, the man grabbed the attacker and threw him to the ground.
The altercation left the man with serious injuries, including a broken nose, which a doctor said would take six weeks to mend. On the other hand, the assailant suffered only a few scratches.
Yet police concluded that both men were responsible for the "fight," in which, according to police, both attacked each other and suffered injuries.
Korea has a "stand-your-ground law" that allows people to use force to protect themselves or others against threats.
But many believe the law is nothing but a name because of its lack of flexibility for defenders.
Under the law, people are allowed to use force to "prevent unjust infringement of one's or another person's legal interest," as long as there are reasonable grounds for that act and the degree of force does not go beyond reasonable bounds. But the law, as precedents and police guidelines show, deems using weapons and inflicting injuries on the attacker that would take more than three weeks to recover from unreasonable ― a standard many find almost impossible to meet in reality.
If both sides sustain injuries, police almost always press assault charges on both, regardless of how the fight started and how serious each person is hurt, urging them to settle and drop allegations.
"Police do not want to give an impression that they are taking sides with anyone," Kwak Dae-kyung, professor at the police administration department of Dongguk University, told The Korea Times. "This is why police are cautious about making a conclusion that one of them did so for self-protection."
Also, there are too many petty altercations for police to handle. "It just takes too much time and effort to find out exactly what happened with physical evidence for every single case," he said. "Thus, police try to conclude the case quickly for everyone involved by convincing them to settle."
Some people refuse to settle and bring the case to court. But the court rarely recognizes self-defense claims.
"The court interprets the law very narrowly, which is the key of the issue," lawyer Kim Yong-min said. "As long as the court's current interpretation stands, there are few things police and prosecutors can do to change it."
According to the law, which states that the defense act should not exceed reasonable limits, the person should not use greater force than that inflicted on him or her, which Kim thinks is the most nonsensical part of the law.
Also, Korean laws do not treat such situations occurring inside homes differently from ones outside. This is why the Chuncheon District Court found a 20-something man guilty of beating a thief who broke into his house in 2014 ― a case that sparked a national debate on the self-defense law.
The man, surnamed Choi, was given an 18-month prison term, suspended for three years, for beating a thief with his fist and an aluminum pole at his house in Wonju, Gangwon Province, at 3 a.m. The thief was rendered brain dead and has remained in a vegetative state.
If the same thing occurred in the United States, experts say Choi would go unpunished for what he did.
Nearly all states in the United States allow people to use deadly force to protect themselves inside their homes, based on the "Castle Doctrine," the legal notion that "your home is your castle and you have the right to use any force to defend it." Many states also have laws that expand the use of deadly force beyond their homes.
But change may be coming here. Over the past few months, dozens of petitions were posted on the Cheong Wa Dae website to urge the government and the National Assembly to revise the self-defense law.
"The current law is ridiculous," one petitioner wrote. "If the person wants to protect himself within the boundaries of law against a robber with a knife, the person should be able to kick the robber's hand to remove the weapon. This is close to impossible."
The presidential office said it will respond to any petition that gains more than 200,000 signatures within a month.
