"Feeling Wronged and Horrified" Lee Geun Expresses Grievance Over 'Sex Crime Punishment'... Concerns About 'Secondary Harm'

Captain Lee Geun "Punished for Sexual Harassment Incident at Club in 2018... Denies It"

Captain Lee Geun / Photo by YouTube screen capture

[Asia Economy reporters Han Seung-gon and Kim Young-eun] Former Captain Lee Geun, who gained fame through 'Fake Men,' has revealed that he was punished for sexual crime charges, and he is expressing his frustration, claiming that his guilt was confirmed solely based on the victim's testimony without any evidence. As a result, criticism is emerging that the victim woman is suffering 'secondary damage' again due to Lee Geun's denial of the charges.

Previously, in the so-called 'Gomtang Restaurant Sexual Harassment' case that occurred in November 2017, the perpetrator also appealed his innocence through a Blue House petition, stating that he was punished based on the victim's consistent testimony. At that time, 'secondary damage' to the victim woman also occurred, leading to a heated controversy.

On the morning of the 13th, Lee Geun admitted to being punished for past sexual harassment. Through his YouTube channel, he said, "I was punished for a harassment incident at a club in 2018," adding, "I was prosecuted for grabbing a woman's buttocks, was fined 2 million won in a summary trial, and my appeal was dismissed."

He continued, "I clearly did not commit any harassment," and expressed his frustration, saying, "The victim woman's consistent testimony was recognized as evidence, leading to a guilty verdict." He added, "There were three closed-circuit (CC) TVs at the time, and evidence showed that I did not commit harassment, but the victim's consistent testimony became the sole evidence for the judgment." He emphasized, "I had no choice but to follow the court's decision, but in light of my conscience, I feel extremely wronged, and I cannot accept it; it is regrettable and dreadful."

Photo by Captain Lee Geun, Instagram capture

The reason Captain Lee is appealing his innocence is that such punishment was based on the 'victim's consistent testimony.' This is the same claim as the perpetrator in the 'Gomtang Restaurant Sexual Harassment' case that occurred in November 2017. Lee claims that he was punished solely based on the victim's testimony without clear evidence.

The 'Gomtang Restaurant Sexual Harassment' case is similar. In this case, a man identified as Mr. A was tried on charges of forcible molestation for grabbing the buttocks of a woman passing by while seeing off his group after a meeting at a Gomtang restaurant in Daejeon on November 26, 2017.

At that time, the testimonies of the victim and Mr. A conflicted over whether he touched the buttocks or merely brushed against them. Mr. A stated, "My body touched the victim, but I did not commit sexual harassment," but based on the victim's consistent testimony that "On the way back after going to the restroom, Mr. A grabbed my buttocks from below to above, and I immediately protested," he was detained in court.

Later, Mr. A's wife posted a petition titled "Please clear my husband's innocence" on the Blue House National Petition website, appealing, "Our country's law is very unfavorable to men in sexual matters. Please help clear my husband's name so that this law is not abused." This post received over 300,000 endorsements within 19 days of its launch.

Regarding this, the court's guilty verdict based on the victim's consistent testimony began to be strengthened in 2018 when the Supreme Court started paying attention to 'gender sensitivity.' This concept is applied to compensate for the disadvantages of socially vulnerable groups and to view and understand sexual crime cases from the context and perspective of the victim's situation.

Meanwhile, criticism is growing that the perpetrator's denial of punishment can lead to secondary harm.

Netizens are voicing concerns about secondary harm, saying things like, "It makes no sense to claim innocence after a verdict and conviction," "Denying the court's decision itself is secondary harm," and "Raising doubts only about the victim's testimony rather than the perpetrator will lead to secondary harm."

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