Supreme Court Orders Joo Gwang-deok and Others to Compensate for Allegations of Sexual Violence Against Ahn Kyung-hwan's Son

Assemblyman Joo Kwang-deok [Photo by Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Seongpil Cho] The Supreme Court has finalized the liability for damages of the Liberty Korea Party (predecessor of the United Future Party) lawmakers who raised allegations that the son of Professor Emeritus An Kyunghwan of Seoul National University committed sexual violence during his high school years.

The Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Presiding Justice Kim Jae-hyung) on the 14th upheld the appellate court's partial ruling in favor of the plaintiff in the damages lawsuit filed by Professor An's son against 10 lawmakers including Representative Joo Gwang-deok of the Liberty Korea Party.

Previously, the second trial court ruled that "Representative Joo shall pay 35 million KRW in damages, and the remaining defendants shall jointly pay 30 million KRW of that amount."

The court stated, "We accept the appellate court's judgment that the defendants' actions constitute defamation by false facts and that parliamentary immunity does not apply," adding, "It cannot be said that the defendants conducted appropriate and sufficient investigations to verify the truthfulness of the allegations made against the plaintiff."

Professor An was nominated as the first Minister of Justice under the Moon Jae-in administration in 2017 but resigned amid controversies including a 'secret marriage registration.'

The allegations related to his son's sexual violence surfaced during the candidate verification process for the ministerial position.

At that time, Representative Joo and nine other lawmakers issued a statement urging the Board of Audit and Inspection to investigate the allegations and held a press conference. Representative Joo also posted the statement on his personal blog.

In response, Professor An's son filed a damages lawsuit seeking 100 million KRW against Representative Joo and the other nine lawmakers, claiming that "based on false facts, the 'relationship between male and female students' was falsely defamed as 'sexual violence by the male student,' causing irreparable damage to his reputation."

The first and second trials recognized the defendants' liability for damages, stating, "The facts indicated by the defendants are clearly false, and the plaintiff's social evaluation of personal value could be severely damaged."

However, considering that "the defendants appeared to have a public interest motive in holding the press conference and issuing the statement," the compensation was set at about one-third of the claimed amount as consolation damages.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.