Supreme Court Confirms Fine for Lee Woo-yeon, Co-author of Anti-Japanese Ethnic Nationalism, in YouTuber Assault Case

Lee Woo-yeon, a research fellow at the Nakseongdae Institute of Economic Research and co-author of 'Anti-Japan Tribalism,' who sparked controversy with remarks related to Japanese military comfort women and victims of the 'Nth Room' case, was fined after being convicted of assaulting a YouTuber who participated in the Wednesday rally hosted by the Justice and Memory Foundation.

Lee claimed that he acted in self-defense after being attacked first, but this was not accepted.

Supreme Court, Seocho-dong, Seoul.

According to the legal community on the 2nd, the Supreme Court's Second Division (Presiding Justice Cheon Dae-yeop) recently upheld the lower court's ruling that sentenced Lee to a fine of 5 million won in his appeal trial on assault charges.

The court explained the reason for dismissing the appeal, stating, "There is no error in the lower court's judgment that violates the rules of logic and experience or exceeds the limits of free evaluation of evidence, nor is there a misinterpretation of the law regarding self-defense that affected the judgment."

Lee was prosecuted for assault after hitting a man in his 60s, YouTuber A, in the face with a fist, causing a fracture with a six-week recovery period, during an altercation around 12:30 p.m. in front of the Yonhap News Agency headquarters building in Jongno-gu, Seoul, following a one-person counter-protest press conference opposing the Justice and Memory Foundation's rally on September 29, 2021. Initially, the prosecution requested a summary order for a fine, but Lee requested a formal trial and received a substantive judgment.

In court, Lee claimed that A approached him while he was resting and smoking a cigarette, provoked him first, and stabbed his neck with his hand. He argued that he felt threatened and swung his fist in self-defense.

However, the first trial court found Lee guilty of assault and sentenced him to a fine of 5 million won.

The court cited Supreme Court precedents on self-defense during fights, stating, "Although the defendant denies the crime, if it is reasonable to view the perpetrator's act not as a defense against the victim's unjust attack but as a fight where both intended to attack each other and the defendant was attacked first and then retaliated, the act is both defensive and offensive and cannot be considered self-defense or excessive self-defense."

It further concluded, "Based on the evidence, it can be sufficiently recognized that the defendant inflicted a six-week injury on the victim, and it cannot be considered self-defense."

The court also noted that Lee neither received forgiveness nor reached a settlement with the victim and considered his attitude in court, which was limited to excuses, as a factor in sentencing.

Lee appealed, but the second trial court reached the same conclusion.

Lee claimed that "the first trial's fine of 5 million won is too heavy and unfair," arguing 'excessive sentencing,' but this was not accepted.

The court stated, "Since no particularly new sentencing materials were presented in the second trial, and there appears to be no significant change in sentencing conditions compared to the original trial, and the circumstances Lee cited as reasons for excessive sentencing were largely reflected in the original sentencing, it cannot be considered that the original sentencing judgment exceeded the reasonable limits of discretion or that maintaining the original sentencing judgment is unfair."

Lee filed another appeal, but the Supreme Court found no issues with the second trial's judgment.

Lee previously sparked controversy by stating that "there is no evidence of forced mobilization of comfort women by Japanese authorities" and that "if Japanese military comfort women are viewed as victims of employment fraud, the perpetrators would be Korean brokers (intermediaries and recruiters), not Japan, making it an incident that occurred among Koreans."

He also caused secondary victimization controversy by posting on his Facebook regarding the 'Nth Room' case, saying, "If I had a daughter, I would teach her not to go near the Nth Room," and "If my daughter were a victim, I would reflect on her behavior and my education."

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