Pedestrian Shot by Police Officer Aiming at Fierce Dog... Court Orders State to Pay 200 Million Won Compensation

Police Bullet Fired to Subdue Fierce Dog
Hits Sidewalk and Bounces, Injuring Pedestrian
Court: "Incident Caused by Officer's Illegal Action"

The court ruled that the state must pay medical expenses and compensation to a pedestrian who was accidentally injured by a bullet fired by police to subdue a dangerous dog.

On the 8th, the Civil Division 29 of the Seoul Central District Court (Presiding Judge Go Seung-il) ruled on the 4th that the state must compensate approximately 209 million won in a damages lawsuit filed by A (68), a U.S. citizen, against the state.

The incident occurred in March 2020 in Pyeongtaek-si, Gyeonggi Province. A pit bull terrier that was out for a walk bit a pedestrian and a pet dog, then entered a nearby residential area and caused chaos by biting other dogs. The police, who responded to the report, fired a Taser to subdue the dangerous dog. The pit bull terrier collapsed briefly after being hit by the Taser but then got up and ran away.

After the Taser was discharged, the police decided to shoot the pit bull terrier. They fired at the pit bull terrier standing on the sidewalk, but missed. The bullet ricocheted off the sidewalk and struck A’s jaw. As a result of the incident, A suffered injuries including a fracture to the right jaw.

The court stated, "The accident occurred due to the illegal act of the police officer who exceeded the permissible scope of using a weapon," and ruled, "The state is responsible for compensating the damages suffered by the plaintiff." The court further pointed out, "At the time, the police were not in a situation where the use of firearms was unavoidable, and they did not prevent bystanders from approaching to avoid damage caused by a ricochet bullet," adding, "They failed to take necessary on-site control measures required for firearm use."

The court also addressed issues related to the use of the Taser. It said, "There was a duty of care to regularly check the Taser’s charge status, which was neglected," but also judged that "A did not fulfill the duty to walk while paying close attention to the front," and thus assigned 90% of the state’s liability for compensation. The police officer who fired the gun faced criminal charges for professional negligence causing injury but was acquitted in the first trial in October last year.

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