Chinese Tourist Sentenced After Swapping Luxury Goods for Counterfeits in Fitting Rooms

Entered Korea with Counterfeit Luxury Goods, Stole Genuine Items
Stole Five Items in Two Days, Causing Damages of 26.82 Million Won

A Chinese tourist who swapped genuine luxury goods for counterfeits in department store fitting rooms in Seoul has been sentenced to prison.

Seoul Central District Court building. Photo by Yonhap News

According to the legal community on October 14, Judge Koo Changgyu of the 12th Criminal Division of the Seoul Central District Court sentenced Chinese national A to six months in prison on charges of theft and ordered the confiscation of five items used in the crime, including counterfeit bags and T-shirts.

A entered South Korea in May on a short-term visit (C3) visa and planned the crime. Before departing, A purchased well-known brand counterfeits online in China and prepared to swap them for genuine items at department stores.

A visited three department stores in Jung-gu and Gangnam-gu, Seoul, repeating the same method. He took genuine products into the fitting room, removed the anti-theft tags, and returned the counterfeit items he had brought in advance. Over just two days, he committed three thefts and stole a total of five luxury goods, causing damages amounting to 26.82 million won.

A’s elaborate scheme was uncovered through closed-circuit television footage, employee statements, and appraisal results. Police compared the genuine and counterfeit items and confirmed the circumstances of the swap, after which A fully admitted to the charges.

He returned all the stolen goods and deposited 11.25 million won with the court to compensate the victims. This deposit is a procedure in which money is entrusted to the court as a sign of remorse when it is difficult to reach a direct settlement with the victims.

The court stated, "Considering that the defendant prepared counterfeits in advance and planned the crime, and that the value of the stolen goods is high, it appears that he entered the country on a short-term visit for the purpose of committing the crime," and handed down a six-month prison sentence.

However, the court explained the sentencing by stating, "We also took into account that the defendant admitted and reflected on his crime, that the stolen goods were returned to the victims, that he reached a settlement with some victims, and that he deposited compensation with the court."

The verdict is now final, as neither A nor the prosecutor appealed the first-instance ruling.