"Stricter Sentence Needed" ... Prosecution Appeals 3-Year Prison Term for Jinju Convenience Store Assault Man

The prosecution has appealed the first-instance sentence of three years in prison handed down to a man in his 20s who violently assaulted a convenience store part-time worker and a customer.

According to the Criminal Division 2 of the Jinju Branch of Changwon District Court in Gyeongnam, the prosecution filed the appeal citing the perpetrator A’s motive and the severity of the crime as reasons.

They presented evidence that A expressed hatred toward a specific group, assaulted a female victim, attacked a male victim who tried to intervene, and showed violent behavior by hitting with objects.

Additionally, considering that A did not make efforts to compensate the victims or show sincere remorse, and that the victims demanded severe punishment, the prosecution judged that a heavier sentence was necessary.

Changwon District Court, Gyeongnam.

Earlier, A is accused of indiscriminately assaulting a female part-time worker at a convenience store in Hadae-dong, Jinju City, around 12:10 a.m. on November 4 last year, and also beating a male customer who tried to stop him.

The part-time worker B suffered injuries to her face, arms, and ears, eventually resulting in damage to the left ear’s cochlear nerve and sensorineural hearing loss, requiring the use of a hearing aid.

The customer C in his 50s also sustained serious injuries to his shoulder, forehead, and nose, received hospital treatment, lost his job during the process, and is currently undergoing psychological therapy due to financial hardship.

At the time of the crime, A, who had been drinking, reportedly said, “Since your hair is short, you must be a feminist,” and “Feminists need to be beaten,” while assaulting B and taking her mobile phone, which he placed in a microwave and operated, causing damage.

He also swung his fists at C, who tried to stop the assault, and struck a chair inside the store.

The prosecution stated, “The abnormal nature of the crime has caused the victims to suffer,” and sought a five-year prison sentence for B, but the first-instance court sentenced A to three years in prison, considering that he committed the crime in a state of diminished mental capacity.

The first-instance court explained, “The Ministry of Justice hospital sent a psychiatric evaluation indicating that the defendant was presumed to be in a state of diminished mental capacity at the time of the crime, with impaired reality testing ability,” and added, “Considering the defendant’s crime circumstances, behavior, and methods, all of which were irrational, diminished mental capacity was recognized.”

It further stated, “The female victim uses a hearing aid, and the man in his 50s received hospital treatment for a week. A was not forgiven by them, and compensation has not been made. Several organizations petitioned for severe punishment, but considering that this was his first offense and that he was in a state of diminished mental capacity, the sentence was determined.”