[Notable Ruling] Neighbor's Dog Attacks Companion Dog... Court Orders 2 Million Won in Emotional Damages

A court has recognized the right to claim compensation for emotional damages (consolation money) for a dog owner whose pet, considered a family member, was injured in an attack by a neighbor's dog.

This ruling is being viewed as a decision that regards companion animals not as mere property or objects of exchange value, but as living beings with emotional bonds.

A visitor trying on pet clothing at the '2025 K-Pet Fair,' a pet industry expo held last March at SETEC in Gangnam-gu, Seoul. (Not directly related to the article content). Photo by Yonhap News

On July 2, the Korea Legal Aid Corporation (Chairman Kim Youngjin) announced that it had secured a ruling in a damages claim case involving an unlawful act against a companion animal, in which the court fully recognized both the entire cost of medical treatment for the dog and 2 million won in consolation money.

According to the Corporation, after losing her husband and falling into deep grief and depression, Ms. A lost her child as well, leaving her with only the companion dog her child had given her as a gift during their lifetime as her remaining family.

However, a dog owned by Ms. B, a next-door neighbor who had let the animal loose while intoxicated, attacked Ms. A's dog, causing severe injuries to its back. Ms. A also sustained injuries to her wrist and hand while trying to intervene.

The cost of the suturing surgery alone for the injured dog amounted to 800,000 won. For Ms. A, who is a recipient of basic livelihood support, this was a burdensome amount, but since the dog was like family to her, the cost was not the main concern.

Subsequently, Ms. A sought assistance from the Corporation to claim compensation for both her own and her dog's medical expenses, as well as for emotional damages.

The Corporation, representing Ms. A in a damages lawsuit against Ms. B, emphasized that "the only thing left for Ms. A now is her companion dog," highlighting that for Ms. A, the dog was more than just property?it was family.

The Corporation also argued that "it is not possible to limit the scope of damages by calculating the value of a companion dog, with whom there is physical and emotional interaction, as a mere object of exchange value."

The court accepted the Corporation's arguments and ruled that Ms. B must pay approximately 830,000 won for Ms. A and her dog's medical expenses, as well as 2 million won in consolation money and interest.

Kim Dongmin, a public legal officer with the Corporation who represented this case, stated, "This ruling is significant in that it does not limit the scope of damages in unlawful acts involving companion animals to mere exchange value," and added, "It serves as a case that raises social awareness about irresponsible behavior by companion animal owners."