A woman charged with swinging a broom at a neighbor's dog after enduring a month of sleep disruption from its barking has received a suspended fine. Although the court found her guilty, the fact that the dog's owner had taken no meaningful steps to address the problem and that she had suffered more than a month of sleep deprivation were taken into account as mitigating factors.
According to legal sources Wednesday, Judge Kim Su-jeong of the Yeoju Branch of Suwon District Court sentenced the defendant, identified only as A, on June 1 to a fine of 1 million won ($682) with a one-year suspended sentence on charges of animal abuse and trespassing. Under the Criminal Act, a suspended fine may be imposed when a fine does not exceed 5 million won and there are grounds for leniency.
According to the facts established by the court, the incident occurred on a morning in May last year.
The victim kept a dog in the garden of her home. A, a neighbor, was accused of entering the garden while the victim was away and striking the dog — a four-year-old male Jindo mix — multiple times with a plastic broom and hitting its kennel, citing the animal's loud and persistent barking.
A was not the only person involved. Another neighbor, identified as B, was found to have taped the dog's mouth and neck 20 minutes before A entered the garden.
When the victim returned home and found her dog behaving unusually, she reviewed closed-circuit television footage and discovered the abuse. She filed complaints against both A and B and reported the case to the media. The story received widespread coverage, and a petition for severe punishment led by an animal rights group drew 26,000 signatures.
Prosecutors subsequently filed summary indictments against both A and B. A summary indictment is a procedure used for relatively minor offenses in which prosecutors request a court to impose a fine without holding a full trial; the court rules based solely on submitted documents. A formal trial may be opened if the court deems the summary procedure inappropriate or if the defendant or prosecutors contest the summary order.
B's case was resolved through the summary fine order, but A proceeded to a full trial. The court found A guilty of animal abuse and trespassing and sentenced her to a fine of 1 million won with a one-year suspended sentence.
The court acknowledged the charges, stating that A "trespassed on the victim's property and subjected the animal to abusive treatment causing pain, on the grounds that the neighbor's dog was barking loudly."
However, the court opted for a suspended fine. In explaining its decision, the court cited five mitigating factors: A had no prior criminal record; she largely acknowledged her wrongdoing; not only A but other neighbors had also suffered from the dog's barking, yet the victim had taken little action to address it; A, a night-shift worker, had endured more than a month of sleep disruption before committing the offense impulsively; and the media coverage that followed the victim's tip-off had already subjected A to considerable public criticism and distress.
The ruling has since been finalized. Neither A nor the prosecution filed an appeal against the first-instance decision.
notstrong@heraldcorp.com
