Contacted Ex 60 Times After Jamsu-ibyeol Breakup... Court Rules "Not Stalking," Acquits Defendant

"Insufficient to Cause Fear... Attempt to Reconcile"
Concerns Over 'Excessive Punishment' in the Era of Jamsu-ibyeol

A man who repeatedly tried to contact his partner in an attempt to reconcile after she unilaterally cut off communication?a situation known as "Jamsu-ibyeol" (ghosting breakup)?stood trial on stalking charges but was acquitted. The court ruled that treating post-breakup contact as a crime constitutes excessive intervention by criminal law and emphasized the need for careful judgment.

This photo is for illustrative purposes only and is unrelated to the article content. Pixabay

According to Yonhap News on July 5, Chief Judge Park Hyunjin of the Criminal Division 2 of the Wonju Branch of Chuncheon District Court acquitted a man in his 30s, referred to as A, who had been indicted for violating the anti-stalking law. Prosecutors had charged A with stalking based on the fact that, after being notified of the breakup, he sent a total of 67 messages and visited areas near his former partner.

The court found that these contacts were not accompanied by threats or coercion. In particular, regarding the "Jamsu-ibyeol" that became central to the case, the court pointed out, "In an era where such abrupt breakups have become common, it is unreasonable to simply define attempts at contact by the other party as a crime."

A and B, who had been in a relationship since early 2023, called each other affectionate names such as "honey" and "husband," and A even sent gifts to B's parents, indicating a deep relationship with marriage in mind. However, on April 10 of the previous year, after an argument over B being late for an appointment, A was the first to announce a breakup to B. B responded by agreeing to end the relationship.

After B took a firm stance on the breakup, A sent more than 60 messages expressing regret, apologies, and affection until April 14 of the same year in an effort to reconcile. When there was no response, A left a bouquet and a letter on B's car a few days later, prompting B to file a police report. After receiving a warning from the police, A ceased all further contact.

The court stated, "The argument on the day of the breakup was not due to violence or verbal abuse, but rather, in a way, for a trivial reason. The defendant impulsively announced the breakup without genuine intent, and when the victim unexpectedly insisted on ending the relationship, he tried to reverse the situation. This is a natural reaction." The court also noted, "In the process of unilaterally ending a long-term relationship, B may have inaccurately described her feelings," and added, "It is insufficient to conclude that A's actions would generally cause anxiety or fear in the other party." The court explained its sentencing by stating that, given the social trend of "Jamsu-ibyeol" becoming more common, legal interpretation must be approached with caution.

The prosecution has appealed the verdict. The case will be reviewed again by the Chuncheon Panel of the Seoul High Court.

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