Teenage perpetrators who assaulted a classmate over a long period, illegally filmed the victim, and then extorted money using the footage—receiving prison terms at first instance—had their sentences reduced on appeal and were sent to the juvenile division.
The Daejeon High Court Criminal Division 1-3 (Presiding Judge Jang Jeong-tae) on the 22nd overturned the lower court's sentence of a maximum of three years and a minimum of one year and six months for A, 17, who was indicted on charges including violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes (coercion using recordings), and sent the case to the juvenile division of the Daejeon Family Court.
B and C, who were indicted together and had been sentenced to prison terms of a maximum of one year and six months and a minimum of one year, were also sent to the juvenile division.
Under the Juvenile Act, a minor under the age of 19 at the time of the offense may receive an indeterminate sentence setting maximum and minimum terms, and after transfer to the juvenile division, dispositions such as protective measures or commitment to a juvenile reformatory for up to less than two years are possible.
While attending a middle school in Cheongyang County, South Chungcheong Province, they were brought to trial on charges of collectively assaulting a classmate victim from Oct. 2022, when they were in the second year of middle school, to Aug. last year, illegally filming parts of the victim's body, and using the footage to threaten the victim.
Investigations found they habitually bullied the victim, calling the victim "slave," "bread shuttle," and "ATM," tying the victim's wrists and body with duct tape, brandishing a weapon, and shaving the victim's hair with an electric clipper, among other acts of cruelty.
In particular, A was found to have extorted money and valuables worth about 6 million won on roughly 160 occasions by threatening to distribute footage containing the victim's nude body.
The appellate panel accepted A's claim of excessive sentencing and overturned the lower court's decision.
The court said, "The nature of the crime is grave in that the victim was tormented over a long period," but added, "The defendants have reflected deeply on their wrongdoing while in custody for a considerable period, and their families have shown a willingness to guide them."
It continued, "A made a criminal deposit for the victim, and the victim also expressed that punishment is not desired," ruling, "We determined that juvenile protective measures, rather than criminal punishment, are appropriate so that growth can occur through careful protection."