Singer Selection Acts and Bikini Motorcycles... Police and Courts Confused by 'Gongginnanyeom Crime'

Over 2,600 Cases Annually Over 5 Years
Numerical and Disgust Sensitivities Vary by Issue
Need to Establish Enforcement Guidelines Based on Latest Precedents

Recently, controversies have arisen over the application of 'public obscenity' and 'excessive exposure' charges in cases such as singer Hwasa's provocative performance and the bikini motorcycle incident in Gangnam-gu, Seoul. Since the degree of discomfort felt varies depending on the extent of body exposure and provocative behavior, the responses of police officers on the scene and judicial rulings have been inconsistent, making it difficult to maintain consistency in law enforcement.

The laws that punish provocative acts or exposure in public places mainly include public obscenity and excessive exposure under the Minor Offenses Act. Public obscenity stipulates that anyone who commits an obscene act in public shall be punished by imprisonment for up to one year or a fine, detention, or penalty not exceeding 5 million won. Excessive exposure applies to those who recklessly expose their naked body excessively or wear see-through clothing that reveals undergarments, or expose areas that should be covered in places visible to many people, causing embarrassment or discomfort to others, and are subject to a fine, detention, or penalty not exceeding 100,000 won.

For public obscenity, both 'publicity' and 'obscenity' must be established. Publicity means a state where an unspecified or large number of people can perceive the act. Obscenity refers to whether there are elements that stimulate sexual desire, judged from the victim's perspective based on feelings of shame or disgust. According to the National Police Agency's crime statistics, the number of public obscenity cases over the past five years was 2,612 in 2018, 2,960 in 2019, 2,606 in 2020, 2,518 in 2021, and 2,343 last year, averaging about 2,600 cases annually. The problem is that the criteria for publicity and obscenity are ambiguous, so judgments can vary depending on the situation. Excessive exposure also lacks a clear standard for what constitutes 'excessive.' There have been cases where individuals were charged even without exposing critical areas. On the 11th of last month, four motorcycles with women wearing bikinis appeared on Teheran-ro in Gangnam-gu. The police charged eight people, including four women and four men driving the motorcycles, with excessive exposure. A police official said, “We try to base it on the discomfort or shame felt by witnesses and victims as much as possible, but since people perceive it differently, it varies depending on the case.”

Judicial rulings have also been inconsistent. In 2016, a man who walked around a cafe in Daegu wearing fishnet thong panties with a genitalia model attached and leather hot pants was sentenced to imprisonment for public obscenity in the first trial but was acquitted in the second trial. Although some witnesses testified that they felt shame, the court ruled that obscenity must be judged objectively and normatively. On the other hand, in 2019, a man who exposed his buttocks by tucking the back of his skirt into pantyhose at a department store in Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi Province, was found guilty. The Supreme Court set the standard that “from the perspective of an average person in society, the overall content should be objectively and normatively evaluated according to sound social norms,” but this also contains the ambiguous concept of 'social norms.'

Bikini riding spotted in Gangnam-gu, Seoul.
[Photo by Online Community Capture]

There have also been cases where a singer's stage performance sparked controversy over obscenity and led to investigations. In December 2009, singer G-Dragon was investigated by prosecutors after performing a dance move suggestive of sexual intercourse at the Seoul Olympic Gymnastics Stadium. At the time, prosecutors stated, “Although it was provocative, the bed performance suggestive of sexual intercourse lasted about two minutes during a two-hour concert, and direct depictions of sexual acts lasted only a few seconds, so it did not reach the level of obscenity,” and issued a deferred indictment. In May, singer Hwasa was reported by the Student-Parent Human Rights Protection Coalition for a performance at Sungkyunkwan University Festival where she licked her finger with her tongue and then touched a specific body part, and was investigated by the police last month on charges of public obscenity. The police conducted an investigation into the intent and background of the performance.

Experts believe that the ambiguity of public obscenity charges is inevitable. Professor Lim Joon-tae of Dongguk University's Department of Police Administration said, “There can be no absolute standard regarding sexual matters; the issue is whether it is at a level that can be socially accepted naturally,” adding, “If legislated in detail, the application of the law may become rigid, and if social attitudes change, it could become obsolete.” However, he emphasized the need for consistent application through guidelines based on the latest precedents. At the police investigation stage, it is necessary to clearly verify the level of body exposure, the degree of the act, the number of witnesses, and whether the actual witnesses felt shame. Professor Lee Woong-hyuk of Konkuk University's Department of Police Science said, “Due to legal ambiguity, frontline police officers may experience confusion when responding on site,” and added, “If the National Police Agency analyzes recent social trends and latest rulings and provides guidelines, it will help maintain consistency in judgments of public obscenity, which can vary among individual officers.”

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