"Our Dog Doesn't Bite" Sisters in Their 30s Shift Accident Responsibility to Middle School Student

Adult Dog at Thigh Height Sold Secondhand Bites Middle School Student
Perpetrator: "Middle School Student Acted Recklessly," Perpetrator's Sibling: "Saw the Transaction Scene" Lies

[Asia Economy Reporter Bang Je-il] Two sisters in their 30s who tried to shift the responsibility for a dog bite accident that occurred during a secondhand goods transaction accompanied by a pet dog onto a middle school victim were both criminally punished.

On the 21st, Judge Lee Ji-soo of Chuncheon District Court Wonju Branch Criminal Division 2 announced that older sister A (32), who was indicted for negligent injury, and younger sister B (30), who was indicted for perjury, were each sentenced to fines of 1 million won and 6 million won, respectively.

A was prosecuted for causing injury to middle school student C (13) by her pet dog biting C during a secondhand transaction of 'AirPods' near a restaurant in Bangok-dong, Wonju-si, Gangwon Province, at 9:14 a.m. on August 11 last year due to negligent management. At the time, the dog was about the height of an adult’s thigh, and C was found to have sustained a bite wound on the arm between the left elbow and wrist.

However, during the trial, A claimed, "My dog did not bite the victim, and even if it did, it was caused by the victim’s reckless behavior, so I am not at fault," shifting the responsibility onto the victim. B, who appeared as a witness in the trial, also testified in favor of her sister, saying, "I witnessed the entire transaction from the terrace of the house, and C recklessly touched the dog’s head, and my sister told C not to come near."

However, investigation revealed that B was in Musil-dong, not Bangok-dong, at the time of the secondhand goods transaction, as confirmed by mobile phone call records and base station locations during the trial. Due to this, B was also charged with perjury and stood trial alongside her sister.

The judge stated, "The young victim found it difficult to immediately protest the dog bite damage to the adult A, and since the victim is also a dog owner, it is hard to see that the bite was caused by reckless behavior while touching the dog," and ruled A guilty of negligent injury.

He added, "B’s courtroom testimony, claiming to have witnessed the scene, was a key factor in proving A’s negligent injury charge, so the crime of perjury is also serious. However, considering that the perjury did not affect the outcome of the negligent injury trial, the sentence was determined accordingly."

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