A wife who reported her husband's stalking, saying, "I'm contacting you even though we're separated." The court ruling is

Contact information required during the process of dissolving a marriage... Claim 'not guilty'
The court said, “It is not continuous or repetitive, so it is not enough to cause fear.”

A man in his 30s who was accused of stalking his estranged wife was cleared of the charges after a legal battle. This is because contact for consultation was necessary during the divorce process, and the contact did not seem to meet the requirements of a stalking crime, such as continuity, repetition, and urgency.

On the 31st of last month, Kim So-yeon, chief judge of the Gwangju District Court's Criminal Division 7, acquitted Mr. A (32), who was put on trial on charges of violating the Stalking Punishment Act. Mr. A is accused of stalking his estranged wife, Ms. B (31), by sending her dozens of text messages asking her to meet him.

Mr. A and Mr. B had been separated since November of last year. At the beginning of the separation, Mr. B requested that Mr. A not make any unnecessary contact other than divorce matters. Mr. A ignored this and continued to contact him to ask about his well-being, including his daily life. After hearing from an acquaintance that Mr. B had another man, he went to her home and office.

According to the Stalking Punishment Act, if you continue or repeat acts such as approaching or contacting the other person against the will of the other person without a justifiable reason, you can be punished by imprisonment for up to 3 years or by a fine of up to 30 million won.

At the trial, Mr. A's legal representative argued that there was a legitimate reason for the contact because there were matters to be legally settled between Mr. A and Mr. B, such as changing the names of various utility bills following the dissolution of the marriage relationship.

The legal representative emphasized that it is difficult to say that Mr. A's actions caused anxiety or fear from the perspective of the general public. At the same time, the judgment of stalking was based on the Supreme Court ruling that comprehensive consideration of ▲content of the text ▲method and meaning of expression ▲relationship between the parties ▲circuit and number of times the text was sent ▲pre and post-war circumstances ▲situation of the other party, etc.

The court also ruled that Mr. A’s actions could not be considered stalking.

Chief Judge Kim said, “It appears that the defendant and the victim clearly needed a consultation process on various issues as their marriage relationship was not legally dissolved,” and “It is acknowledged that the defendant contacted the victim several times in relation to the issue of the opposite sex, but considering the content and number of transmissions, it is difficult to conclude that he continuously and repeatedly created anxiety and caused fear in the victim.”

Lawyer Naeun-jung Dae-ryun of Law Firm (Limited), who represented Mr. A, said, "This case required consideration of the special nature of being a married couple under the law. The other party allowed text messages in relation to legal issues such as divorce, and the conversation continued in the process." He added, "The contact was also just a one-time or discontinuous act and was completely unintentional. We were able to safely prove that the elements of stalking crime, such as continuity, repetition, and urgency, were not met. “We were able to get an acquittal,” he explained.

[View full article] - A wife who reported her husband's stalking, saying, "I'm contacting you even though we're separated." The court ruling is (link)