Thief case raises questions over self-defense
.jpg?w=728)
By Chung Hyun-chae
A controversial debate over the right to self-defense has continued to grip the nation since a district court ruled in August that a man in his 20s was found guilty of excessively beating a thief who broke into his house. The convicted man was sentenced to 18 months in prison.
The court’s decision has prompted questions over the legal definitions of self-defense and circumstances in which citizens have the right to exercise it.
The man at the center of the issue, surnamed Choi, returned home in Wonju, Gangwon Province, with his friends around 3 a.m. on March 8 and found a thief rummaging through drawers. Initially, Choi hit the thief in the face with his fist and then with an aluminum pole taken from a laundry drying rack. The thief was rendered brain dead and has remained in a vegetative state since the beating.
The court prosecuted Choi with a charge of “excessive self-defense” citing that he used a “dangerous object” to attack the unarmed thief who was reportedly set to flee.
Experts divided over court ruling
Legal experts are sharply divided over the case. Some argue that Choi acted with reasonable self-defense, while others say that he went too far.
The case indicates that the nation needs to reach a consensus on the definition and extent of what is called self-defense.
“Even though the thief was seriously hurt by the blow and remains in a vegetative state, he initially broke in someone’s house in the middle of night. It was almost impossible for the homeowner to find whether the thief is just a thief or a rapist or a murderer in such an urgent situation,” said a 24-year-old college student who asked not to be named.
“Should we be cautious not to hurt a perpetrator when we defend us?” a citizen asked on an online blog.
“The court ruling was based on the criminal law that stipulates there should be an imminent threat and that it’s proven that a victim was in circumstances that justify a proportional response in order for the case to be an act of self-defense,” said Kim Hak-ja, a lawyer with law firm Haneul.
Proportional response, the aspect of the law at the center of debate over Choi’s case, means whether the degree of force used to repel an intruder or attacker exceeds that necessary to remove the threat to people and property.
“The court considered the thief as the bigger loser because he was left brain dead while the homeowner Choi suffered no physical injury.” said Kim.
She insisted that the court should be more generous toward self-defense.
“It is not all about deciding whether someone is guilty or not, but the court should define one of the most important values for the public and society,” Kim said.
In contrast, some people have expressed sympathy with the court’s decision.
“If Choi were cleared of any criminal charges on the grounds of self-defense, confusion and chaos would arise because someone might abuse the right to self-defense in order to take retaliatory action against a perpetrator,” wrote an Internet user nicknamed “dandelion” in an online post.
“The thing is, the homeowner repeatedly punched the thief even after he overpowered him,” Kim Sang-gun, another lawyer, said. “We need to exclude personal feelings and just follow the law which has been established a long time ago.”
Kim pointed to the damage Choi did not only to the thief but also to his family. His brother committed suicide, apparently because he could not pay the huge medical bills for his brain dead sibling who remains in a hospital bed.
“The court ruling didn’t imply that we cannot defend ourselves against any perpetrators. The law just protects other potential victims from excessive self-defense,” Kim said.
Similar cases in Korea
Korea is seen as having strict standards on the right to self-defense.
For example, a wife who killed her husband for consistently demanding perverse sex, even while the couple were in the process of filing for divorce, was given a prison term.
The court concluded that killing the husband went beyond self-defense.
More recently, the Seoul High Court sentenced a 23-year-old man surnamed Kim to six months in prison, suspended for one year, for biting off part of a lady’s tongue as she tried to forcibly kiss him during a binge drinking session in June.
The woman, who is an acquaintance of Kim’s girlfriend, tried to kiss him while he lay drunk and unconscious on the floor at 4 a.m. He awoke when she tried to kiss him and Kim said he bit her, claiming it was an act of self-defense.
The court said his action did not constitute self-defense because he could have responded differently by pushing her away or seeking help from others rather than “seriously injuring” her.
“Kim’s act went beyond the norms of our society, so his claim of self-defense is not justifiable,” Judge Kim Sang-hwan said when passing sentence.
However, another judge acknowledged self-defense in a similar case in 2012. The only difference between the two cases was the gender of the victim.
A woman in her 20s bit off the tongue of a taxi driver surnamed Lee when he attempted to rape her at her house. The two met in a bar. The court sided with the woman who claimed that she acted in self-defense.
“Proportionality matters in this case as well. The court saw there was a high possibility of sexual violence having occurred, which is severe compared to tongue injuries, in the latter case, while the man was not in a deadly situation in the first case,” said Kim, the lawyer with Haneul.
Revision bill for broader scope of self-defense
Choi is currently serving his term, with an appeal scheduled to begin next month raising the question of whether or not his actions were justified.
Rep. Park Min-shik of the ruling Saenuri Party proposed a revision to the criminal law last month, 60 years after the law was enacted, in order to ease the requirements for justifiable defense.
According to him, the term “proportional response” should be deleted in order to ensure that people can protect themselves from perpetrators by relying on self-defense in a broader sense.
Seven students of Hankyong National University contributed to the above report. They are among 15 students majoring in English at the university who took part in a journalism internship training program organized by The Korea Times from Nov. 25-28. They are Kim Su-hwan, Kim Young-min, Bang Il-seok, Park Young-eun, Park Yea-jin, Lee Bo-na and Jeong Hea-hyun.