Defendant who repeatedly bullied actor Shin Se-kyung online sentenced to eight months in prison... ”Setting a significant legal precedent”

Defendant A, who had engaged in malicious cyberbullying against actor Shin Se-kyung for several years, was sentenced to eight months in prison.

It was confirmed that A had repeatedly posted insulting remarks and threatening messages targeting not only Shin Se-kyung but also her family, acquaintances, and fans using an anonymous account. The court recently charged A with offenses including insult and threat, and ruled that “the crimes were repetitive and premeditated, the level of threat was high, and the harm caused to society was significant,” thereby imposing the prison sentence.

　The court determined that the malicious insults and threats, which were carried out repeatedly over a long period of time, caused mental anguish equivalent to physical violence, and thus constituted a clear crime. The prison sentence is a judicial declaration that clearly indicates the seriousness of such behavior. This ruling is an unusual case where a prison sentence was imposed in a cyberbullying case involving a public figure, and it is seen as a major turning point not only for celebrities but also for the protection of online crime victims.

　In connection with this, the artist's agency, THE PRESENT COMPANY, stated, “Upon learning of the artist's victimization, we immediately recognized the severity of the case and took official warnings and legal measures on multiple occasions. However, the harmful behavior did not cease but instead continued to escalate, leading to the criminal complaint in this case.” They further emphasized, “This ruling goes beyond being a mere issue concerning an individual actor; it will serve as a significant legal precedent warning society at large of the severity of cyber violence.”

　The agency also stated, “The severity of a crime is merely a difference in the level of punishment. The moment one acts with malicious intent and causes mental distress to another person, they are already liable as a perpetrator.” It further clarified, “Behavior that threatens someone's life or damages their reputation while hiding behind anonymity is a clear crime that is not protected as freedom of expression.” They added, “This ruling is a judicial message that clearly outlines the legal boundaries and standards of responsibility between simple online opinions and crimes, and it will serve as a catalyst for a shift in societal awareness.”

　In particular, he made clear the position that “the perpetrator must inevitably bear legal responsibility commensurate with the severity of the incident, regardless of how long it takes, and in the event of similar incidents in the future, all legal measures will be mobilized to respond resolutely, with no leniency.”

　Kim Ji-ae, a lawyer at Ascendant Yoolbon Law Firm who has been representing the actor since the early stages of the case, stated, “This was a case that caused great concern due to the repeated mental anguish and the spread of the perpetrator's actions.” She added, “Without the swift response of the agency and the prompt investigation by the authorities, all the efforts to organize the vast amount of evidence and resolve the case would have been in vain.”

　Additionally, she emphasized, “Even if the actions took place in cyberspace, any behavior that infringes upon another person's dignity is subject to legal liability.” She stressed, “This ruling carries significant meaning as it sends a social message that violent expressions made recklessly online will no longer be tolerated.”