Asian Junkie Asian pop. Without discretion.
A few weeks ago, a somewhat unsettling update was provided regarding the rape case of former NCT member Taeil, as prosecution was asking for just seven years for him and his co-perpetrators, and his defense was already begging for less due to settlements being made.
Today, the sentence has been decided, and Taeil and his co-conspirators will serve just three years and six months in prison for aggravated quasi-rape, along with some other minor stuff.
On July 10, the Seoul Central District Court Criminal Division 26 sentenced Taeil and two other defendants to three years and six months in prison for violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes (Aggravated Quasi-Rape). The court also ordered them to complete 40 hours of sexual violence education and imposed a five-year employment restriction at institutions involving children or adolescents.
The crazy thing about the sentence is that the court rejected his argument for leniency, so this is somewhat worse than what was possible for him.
The court stated, “The defendants admitted to the crime, and based on the evidence, they are found guilty. The victim was in a state of helplessness due to intoxication, and the crime was committed at Mr. Lee’s residence. The foreign tourist is experiencing significant psychological trauma as she was assaulted in an unfamiliar place. However, the court considered the fact that the defendants were first-time offenders and that the victim did not wish to pursue punishment as favorable factors.”
Taeil’s legal representative previously requested leniency on the grounds that Taeil submitted a written confession to the authorities. However, the court rejected this, stating, “Since the confession came after the search and seizure of the defendant, it cannot be considered voluntary surrender and thus does not warrant sentence reduction.”
Since there are always questions about “quasi-rape”, basically that’s when the victim is incapacitated. Why have that designation? Because unless things changed very recently, in order to be convicted of rape in South Korea, even violence or intimidation is not enough, they must be unable to actively resist.
Consent should be at the heart of any legal definition of rape. Article 297 of South Korea’s penal code defines rape as intercourse by means of “violence or intimidation.” Korean legal scholars and lawyers have noted that the country’s courts have interpreted the law extremely narrowly, such that to constitute rape, it is insufficient for “violence or intimidation” to be present, but rather it should render the victim unable to resist. The courts also find mitigating circumstances when imposing punishments, such as the offender having no previous criminal record or being “mentally weak” when committing the crime.
I learned about this during the Yoochun case, where a key argument was essentially that the bathroom was small, so how could she not have made a ruckus trying to get out through the door.
Regardless, obviously an offensive sentence for a purposeful and planned plying and gang-rape of a vulnerable woman on vacation that they saw as a target. I’m glad the victim apparently got a settlement, as obviously material compensation can help if justice is hard to come by, but at some point it’s just a rich person getting a different legal system, and more importantly it’s just a matter of public safety. These three are predators, I wouldn’t be surprised if they’ve done this before, and they’re going to be out in a few.
