1st Trial Not Guilty → Overturned to Guilty in 2nd Trial
Credibility of Victim's Testimony Divides Judgment
The guilty verdict for the former wheelchair fencing national team coach, who was on trial for forcibly molesting a female assistant in her 20s, has been finalized.
According to the legal community on the 21st, the Supreme Court's 2nd Division (Presiding Justice Kim Sang-hwan) upheld the original court ruling that sentenced former wheelchair fencing national team coach Mr. A to a fine of 5 million won on charges of forcible molestation.
The court stated the reason for dismissing Mr. A's appeal was that "there was no error in overturning the first trial's acquittal and affirming the second trial's guilty verdict, as the latter did not violate the principles of logic and experience, nor exceed the limits of free evaluation of evidence, nor misinterpret the principles of party disposition, trial-centeredness, direct examination, or the defendant's right to a fair trial."
Mr. Park was indicted on charges of molesting Ms. B, a national team assistant, in the hotel parking lot at the training camp on August 18, 2020, during his tenure as coach.
According to the prosecution's allegations, Mr. A was conducting a training camp with Ms. B and national team athletes at an undisclosed location in Haenam-gun, Jeollanam-do. The training camp lasted from August 14 to August 22, 2020.
On August 16, 2020, the day before the incident, Mr. A, drinking with the athletes in one athlete's hotel room, called Ms. B at 11:28 p.m. to join the drinking party.
After midnight, when the drinking party ended, Mr. A, intoxicated, said he was going home, but Ms. B and another athlete, Mr. C, stopped him and followed. Mr. A prevented Mr. C from entering the elevator, so only Mr. A and Ms. B took the elevator. While moving toward the hotel parking lot, Ms. B repeatedly suggested returning to the room where they had been drinking.
At that time, Mr. A grabbed Ms. B's hand and said, "Let's go on a date. Let me ask a favor," and "Let's have a kiss once," then suddenly touched Ms. B's buttocks several times with his palm as if patting.
In court, Mr. A completely denied the charges. He claimed he did not touch Ms. B's buttocks, and even if there was physical contact, it occurred during a struggle without intent to molest.
The first trial court acquitted Mr. A, judging Ms. B's testimony as unreliable.
The court stated, "The defendant has consistently denied the charges from the investigation to this court," and "Although there is direct evidence in the form of the victim's statements at the court and investigation (including complaint reports and petitions) that seem to align with the charges, it is difficult to fully trust them."
The first reason for this judgment was that Mr. A's statements were inconsistent and fluctuated.
Specifically, Ms. B's complaint and petition sent to the association immediately after the incident stated, "On the morning of the incident, my eyes were swollen, and when people asked why, I initially said it was because I slept late, but when they kept asking, I said it was accumulated from last year and I was upset, so I told the athletes (on August 17, 2020)." However, during the trial, she testified that she disclosed the molestation during a drinking party with athletes on Friday, August 21, 2020, near the end of the training camp.
The court pointed out, "Ms. B's statements about when she informed the athletes of being molested by the defendant are contradictory and inconsistent."
Additionally, based on KakaoTalk group chat conversations, the court found that Ms. B and other athletes conspired to say that other athletes heard about the molestation from Ms. B on the morning of August 17, 2020, the day of the incident.
A witness athlete, Mr. D, testified in court that "a few days after the incident, at a drinking party with Ms. B and other athletes before the training camp ended, one athlete led a conversation to frame Mr. A as a molester and remove him from the coaching position." Mr. D also testified that when he suggested to other athletes to "go to Mr. A and apologize," he was told, "Would Mr. A forgive us then?" This testimony supported the court's judgment.
Furthermore, during the second police investigation, Ms. B testified that "on August 18, 2020, during exercise time, Mr. A approached me and tapped my buttocks about twice, and at that moment, I was startled and realized that Mr. A's previous actions were molestation." The court found this inconsistent with her earlier statement that "I cried and fell asleep in the early morning of the incident day, so my eyes were swollen," and the petition stating "At that time, I was extremely ashamed, distressed, and depressed, and even after some time, thinking about that day made me feel ashamed and wronged to the point of madness."
Based on this, the court stated, "At the time of the incident, the victim did not perceive the defendant's physical contact as molestation in any way."
The court also noted, "Since the defendant is a lower-body disabled person using a wheelchair, if there was a struggle between the defendant and the victim in close proximity, the victim's hand or arm might have unintentionally touched the defendant's pelvis or buttocks. Also, when the defendant, seated in a wheelchair, reaches out to call or push someone nearby, it is likely to be near the person's waist or pelvis."
Ms. B testified in court that "the defendant tapped the side of my buttocks with his left hand," but the court judged, "Considering this testimony, it is possible that during the struggle, the defendant pushed or tapped the victim without intent to molest, just to tell her to go."
Finally, the court added, "It appears that the relationship between the defendant and the athletes he coached was not good, and considering that the victim applied for the vacant national team coaching position after the defendant resigned due to this incident, it seems the victim and other athletes wanted the defendant to be disciplined and step down from the national team coach position due to the molestation charges."
However, the second trial court's judgment differed. The second trial court found Mr. A guilty of forcible molestation and sentenced him to a fine of 5 million won.
The second trial court found the victim's testimony generally consistent and, even if there were some contradictions regarding when the victim disclosed the incident, it was not enough to distrust the entire testimony.
The court pointed out that Ms. B specifically and consistently recalled how she came late to the drinking party the day before the incident, how she ended up alone with Mr. A, what Mr. A said and did while going toward the parking lot, and how she acted, stating, "The victim's testimony is largely consistent and very detailed, and there is no irrationality or contradiction in the testimony based on common experience."
The court noted that the first trial court's main reason for judging Ms. B's testimony as contradictory was about when she informed other athletes of the molestation, which could have been coordinated to hide the drinking.
A witness athlete testified that "the athletes discussed with their wives to hide the fact that they drank on August 21, 2020, fearing disciplinary action that could affect their status as national athletes, and left such messages in the KakaoTalk group chat." His wife also testified similarly in court. The athletes also testified that they were disciplined after the drinking was revealed.
The court also found the first trial court's judgment that Ms. B did not perceive the incident as molestation on the day of the incident to be incorrect.
The court stated, "The lower court said the victim's second police investigation testimony contradicted the petition and that the victim did not perceive the defendant's physical contact as molestation at the time. However, considering the overall context before and after the testimony, the victim's statement is better interpreted as 'The victim had previously noticed the defendant tapping her buttocks and found it strange, but only after experiencing this incident on August 18, 2020, did she realize those acts were molestation,' rather than 'The victim only realized the physical contact on August 18 was molestation.'
The court continued, "The defendant was the wheelchair fencing national team coach, and the victim was a team assistant. Considering their ages, positions, duties, and relationship, it is understandable that the victim did not clearly recognize or find it easy to raise the issue as a crime at the time of the incident."
The court also pointed out that Ms. B did not apply for the coaching position Mr. A vacated immediately after his resignation.
The court stated, "The victim applied for a full-time coaching position responsible for scouting new athletes on May 4, 2021, but did not apply for the national team coach position. Therefore, this application cannot be seen as a motive for the victim to make false statements against the defendant."
Finally, the court noted that statements written by athletes after Mr. A's acquittal in the first trial were drafted and provided by Mr. A himself, so they do not hinder recognizing the defendant's guilt.
Mr. A appealed again, but the Supreme Court also found no problem with the second trial court's judgment.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
