 |
The release of a new movie that is based on a “crossbow terror” case in 2007, in which a judge was attacked by a professor, is causing controversy among the general public and the judiciary here.
“Unbowed,” directed by Chung Ji-young, is showing signs of becoming a box office hit, drawing some 50,000 viewers on the first day of its release Wednesday.
This reflects keen public interest in the case as well as the movie, in which a judge is depicted as being arrogant and biased, while the defendant is seen as innocent, analysts say.
The case is about a mathematics professor, Kim Myung-ho, who shot a judge with a crossbow out of anger when the latter ruled against him in an appeals court.
The professor had filed a suit against a university that had dismissed him. A broken arrow, reportedly found at the scene of the incident, was to serve as evidence to back the professor’s innocence, but it wasn’t produced at his trial as the presiding judge ruled it inadmissible.
Even before the release of the movie, the Supreme Court expressed concern that it might misrepresent the case and distort the image of the court. The movie was made with the help of Kim and his lawyer Park Hoon.
The top court pointed out misleading parts in the movie to lower courts and told judges to explain these to reporters when answering questions.
“We received emails summarizing the case with explanations about controversial scenes in the movie from the Supreme Court, but we’re not allowed to release them to the media,” said a judge at the Seoul Central District Court.
Park said in a recent interview with Yonhap News Agency that the trial scene was “about 98 percent close to reality.” He had initially said that the movie was 100 percent equivalent to what happened to his client in an earlier interview.
The movie, as expected, has caused a stir among viewers on and offline regarding the “truth” surrounding the case.
The controversial scenes include the presiding judge refusing the defendant’s appeal for the prosecution to show the broken arrow, and rejecting Park’s request to cross examine the victim. In these scenes, the defendant is apparently depicted as a person who values principles and is a fighter for justice.
“It was sad to see the reality of the Korean judicial system’s dismissive attitude,” said hon**** on Twitter. Another tweeter said, “It is right to urge the judiciary to reflect on their actions through the movie.”
However, others were careful about the movie glorifying the defendant’s actions as if it was heroic.
“It’s not right to treat Kim as a hero. Even if he didn’t intend to shoot the judge with the crossbow, it is a crime that he brought it to threaten a person. The judges must have also considered this unacceptable,” said doo****.
Culture critic Chin Jung-kwon said on his Twitter account, “A movie is a movie. We shouldn’t confuse it with reality. Besides, it’s clear when you read the trial records that Kim was the one who turned the trial procedure into a mess.”
