Poet Park Jinseong, Who Claimed "False MeToo Allegations," Sentenced to 1 Year and 8 Months in Prison

Poet Park Jinseong Accused in 'MeToo' Case Sentenced to Prison

Poet Park Jin-seong (43), who revealed the real name and resident registration card of a 17-year-old woman who accused him of sexual harassment and claimed that the 'Me Too' allegations against him were false, has been sentenced to prison.

Poet Park Jin-seong.
Photo by Park Jin-seong Facebook capture

According to the legal community on the 6th, the Supreme Court's 1st Division (Presiding Justice No Tae-ak) recently upheld the original sentence of 1 year and 8 months imprisonment for Park, who was indicted for defamation under the Information and Communications Network Act. Park was accused of sending multiple messages that caused sexual humiliation to Ms. A (then 17 years old), whom he met while conducting online lessons in September 2015, until October of the following year.

In October 2016, when Ms. A exposed the damage she suffered, Park posted 111 false statements on his social networking service (SNS) from March 29 to November 26, 2019, including expressions such as "I hope no one is falsely made a sexual offender" and "False accusations are serious crimes." Park also mentioned Ms. A's resident registration card and real name.

The first trial court sentenced him to 1 year in prison with a 2-year probation. However, both Park and the prosecution appealed, citing inappropriate sentencing. The second trial overturned the original ruling and sentenced Park to 1 year and 8 months in prison, ordering his immediate detention in court.

The appellate court stated, "The defendant denied his crimes and only after the indictment did he close his X (formerly Twitter) account and claim to have shown remorse by participating in a campaign to post positive comments, but he never took actions to stop the baseless personal attacks against the victim," adding, "There is no sign of effort to empathize with the victim's pain." It further explained the sentencing rationale, saying, "Considering that the victim continues to suffer mental distress due to the defendant's actions and is pleading for severe punishment, the original sentence was too lenient and inappropriate." Park disagreed with the appellate court's decision, but the Supreme Court found no error in the ruling and dismissed his appeal.