A Man in His 60s Secretly Used Neighbor's Water Pipe for 1 Year and 8 Months... What Was the Penalty?

Suwon District Court Upholds 5 Million Won Fine

A man in his 60s who illegally used water by connecting his house to a neighbor's water pipe for one year and eight months has received a fine in the appellate court, following a similar ruling in the first trial.

Suwon District Court building. Photo by Yonhap News

On January 30, Yonhap News Agency reported that the Criminal Appeals Division 5-1 of the Suwon District Court (Presiding Judges Kim Haengsun, Lee Jongrok, and Park Shinyoung) dismissed the appeal of Mr. A, who had been indicted on theft charges and fined 5 million won in the first trial, thereby upholding the original verdict.

Mr. A was accused of connecting a water pipe from the boiler room of Mr. B's house to his own home and stealing tap water, while constructing Mr. B's house in a village across from his own in Yangpyeong County, Gyeonggi Province, from June 2021 to February 2023. At the time, Mr. A was reportedly engaged in building, selling, and leasing houses.

Mr. B discovered that the water pipe in his boiler room was connected to Mr. A's house while conducting a leak detection inspection after his house was flooded. However, Mr. A denied the charges, claiming that he connected the water pipe only as a precaution for emergencies and did not use Mr. B's tap water.

The court did not accept Mr. A's claims. The panel explained that while leak detection was underway at Mr. B's house, the main valve was closed but the water meter continued to operate; after the pipe connected to Mr. A's house was cut, the meter stopped. In addition, after the pipe leading to Mr. A's house was blocked, the water pumped from the village’s well, where Mr. B lived, decreased significantly. The court further noted that there was no evidence that Mr. A had informed Mr. B about the installation or purpose of the water pipe at the time of transferring the house, and that Mr. B had been unaware of the pipe’s existence until he discovered it during the leak inspection. Therefore, the court found Mr. A's claims to be unconvincing.

The appellate court stated, "The original ruling, which found that the defendant stole tap water owned by the victim, is reasonable and acceptable," and added, "There was no factual error or misunderstanding of the law as claimed by the defendant in the original verdict."