Assault After Mask-Wearing Request Followed by Retaliatory Assault... 60s Sentenced to 1 Year in First Trial

Assault on Convenience Store Worker Who Requested Mask Wearing Followed by Retaliatory Assault
Court Sentences to 1 Year Imprisonment: "Offender Did Not Show Remorse and Committed Crime for Retaliation, Guilt Is Serious"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyunjung] A man in his 60s who assaulted a convenience store employee after being fined for assaulting the employee who asked him to wear a mask was sentenced to prison in the first trial.

The Criminal Division 1 of Wonju Branch of Chuncheon District Court (Chief Judge Shin Gyosik) announced on the 22nd that Mr. A (67), who was arrested and prosecuted on charges of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes (retaliatory injury, etc.), was sentenced to one year in prison.

Mr. A was prosecuted on charges of causing injuries requiring two weeks of medical treatment to employee Ms. B (56, female) at a convenience store in Dandae-dong, Wonju-si, Gangwon Province, around 10:40 a.m. on May 7, after becoming angry when Ms. B asked him to wear a mask. After receiving a summary order with a fine of 3 million won, Mr. A harbored resentment and returned to the same convenience store at 7:50 p.m. on August 21, about a week before the formal trial.

Mr. A was charged with causing injuries requiring three weeks of medical treatment again by assaulting employee Ms. B, grabbing and shaking her hair, and punching her face while saying, "You're the one who reported me because of the mask last time," and "Why did you report me?"

During the trial, Mr. A admitted to injuring Ms. B but claimed, "It was accidental and not intended as retaliation." However, the court regarded Mr. A's actions as retaliation and sentenced him to one year in prison, stating, "He committed the crime with heavy guilt, harboring resentment over the victim submitting a medical certificate to the investigative agency, which led to investigation and punishment." The court also said, "There is a high possibility of criticism for not refraining from wrongdoing before the formal trial and returning to the victim to commit the crime again," and "Considering that he was not forgiven by the victim, the sentence was determined."

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