'The Tam-sa' Visits Han Dong-hoon... Legal Community Says "Trespassing Charges Possible"

Unauthorized Entry into Shared Entrance
Difficult to Justify Reporting
Interpretations Differ on Retaliatory Crime Status

Minister of Justice Han Dong-hoon [Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Jang Sehee] Interest is focused on whether there will be any punishment in the future as Minister of Justice Han Dong-hoon filed a lawsuit against the YouTube channel 'The TamSa' that visited his residence and broadcasted on YouTube. The legal community evaluated that while the charge of trespassing is applicable, the charge of retaliatory crime could be subject to interpretation.

The TamSa reporters filmed and exposed the entire process of passing through the main gate and the shared entrance of Minister Han's apartment complex located in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and arriving at the front door of his residence around 1 p.m. on the 27th.

They stated the purpose of their visit, saying, "Minister Han should also empathize with how the reporters felt when they were suddenly subjected to a search and seizure." The TamSa reporters repeatedly rang the doorbell in front of Minister Han's front door and even examined a delivery box placed there. In response, Minister Han filed a complaint with the Seoul Suseo Police Station against five TamSa reporters for charges of trespassing in a shared residence and retaliatory crime.

The legal community believes that the charge of trespassing will be recognized considering ▲ entering the shared entrance or ringing the doorbell without the consent of the parties involved ▲ not going through the normal entry process with the security guard ▲ not possessing an elevator key.

Seo Ji-won, a lawyer at Naran Law Firm, said, "Entering the apartment complex and shared entrance without permission can constitute the crime of trespassing," adding, "Since the reporting does not necessarily have to be done at the front door, the legitimacy of the reporting is also difficult to be highly recognized." She added, "However, the remark asking to empathize may be difficult to interpret as threatening behavior."

Kim Han-gyu, former chairman of the Seoul Bar Association, said, "Even if you go up to the front of a house or apartment, the resident's consent is practically required," and added, "Since this act was carried out while one of the company members was under stalking investigation, it is questionable whether it can be considered legitimate reporting." He also stated, "However, regarding the charge of retaliatory crime, it seems necessary to make an accurate judgment on whether there was intent or if it was a simple accidental act."

In fact, the Supreme Court ruled in January that common areas such as elevators inside multi-family houses, multi-unit houses, row houses, and apartments, which are shared housing, need to protect the residents' peaceful living and thus fall under the 'person's residence' subject to the crime of trespassing. The Busan District Court also interpreted in a 2015 ruling that entering the apartment shared entrance arbitrarily while another resident was entering constitutes intrusion into the victim's residence. Trespassing can be established even if the resident opened the door for entry.

Meanwhile, entering another person's residence is punishable by imprisonment of up to three years or a fine of up to 5 million won. According to the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes, a person who, without justifiable reason, forces an interview or exerts power against a person or their relatives who know necessary facts related to the investigation or trial of their own or another's criminal case shall be punished by imprisonment of up to three years or a fine of up to 3 million won.