“The Law Stands with Victims” Series: The unforgettable moment—the Supreme Court overturns the lower court’s ruling
By Lee Eunui
Published: February 6,
2023
Translated by Jun Jihai
※Editor’s Note: This series documents attorney Lee Eunui’s legal battles on sexual violence and #MeToo cases, which have brought controversy in Korean society for the last several years.
“We void the original
ruling.”
On the morning of
November 25, 2021, at the Korean Supreme Court, I tried to cover up my screams
of joy as I dashed out of the courtroom to call my client, Kim Wonkyeong, who had
not been able to make it. Six years had passed since Ms. Kim made her accusation
of sexual harassment in the workplace. And that day, the Supreme Court declared
her a victim.
 |
| As the Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s ruling and remanded the case to the court of original instance about Ms. Kim's civil lawsuit against the perpetrator, she was finally recognized as a victim. Ms. Kim took a photograph for celebration outside the courthouse holding a banner that read “I didn’t back down.” ⓒKim Wonkyeong |
The sexual harassment committed against a twentysomething employee by a sixtysomething director
An employee of Seoul
National University Children’s Hospital Foundation, Ms. Kim was in charge of
selecting recipients of donations among child patients, determining the extent
of support, and helping with sponsorship events. Her co-workers and supervisors
saw Ms. Kim as an employee who exceled at her job and completed her tasks
perfectly under any conditions. However, in 2015, she experienced harassment
and sexual harassment by a dentist in his sixties who came to the hospital as a
collaborative physician and an adjunct professor. She was then twenty-eight
years old.
The perpetrator was a
director in the foundation, a position that gave him power to give orders
directly to the employees while organizing and overseeing events . In the name
of business, he verbally abused and yelled at the employees, including Ms. Kim,
on a daily basis. He even sexually harassed Ms. Kim verbally and physically
during work hours. She told her coworkers about what happened but did not dare
to make an official complaint to the higher-ups.
On October 15 of that
year, the foundation held a fundraiser at a golf course in Gyeonggi-do. The
perpetrator made the unreasonable request that only Ms. Kim go with him to the
event site. The fact that the event needed more than two employees was no
matter to consider for him. Her supervisors and co-workers were aware of her
agony due to the perpetrator, so they made her bring a recording device from
the office with her. Unfortunately, their concerns turned out to be valid.
In the VIP room of the
golf course, the perpetrator scanned Ms. Kim’s body up and down, sexually
harassing her by saying, “You have bright skin. Used to be so skinny, but you
look fat these days.” “You have thin and bright legs. Are you using brightening
cream? Do you shave fuzz on your body?” He even said, “Got a boyfriend
recently? Why did you become so fat? You must be neglecting your work, deeply
distracted.” He said she needed to be caned and forced her to bring him a tree branch.
In the face of this
torrent of words and demands from a man older than her father, Ms. Kim said she
was terribly flustered. She thought nobody would be willing to help her and was
too humiliated to tell what happened word by word to her coworkers as
it was going on [though she had been texting with them during the event]. The
perpetrator broke the branch she brought and used it on her buttocks, and
hugged her from behind. And it was not a one-time incident at the golf
course—he continued the sexual harassment outside the event site.
There was no such thing
as an app to hail a taxi at that time. In addition, Ms. Kim was still on the
duty. Despite the shock, she managed to complete her tasks and got into the perpetrator’s
car, the same one she had taken when coming to the golf course. As he hurled
criticism of her work performance, the perpetrator grabbed a plastic bottle and
poked her chest area. As the car entered the downtown and stopped before a
crosswalk, she jumped out of the car. She immediately reported the incident to
her supervisor.
The criminal court’s decision of not guilty due to “lack of
evidence”
In this way, the sexual
harassment Ms. Kim experienced in the workplace came to the surface. At first,
it seemed her complaint was being handled properly. The senior-level
decision-makers of the hospital questioned and rebuked the perpetrator, which
made him admit his wrongdoing and apologize in a written letter. However, there
were no further follow-up measures such as a proper investigation or
disciplinary actions. Ms. Kim decided to bring criminal charges. Not until the
first trial began did she find out that the perpetrator had hired a team of attorneys
from [large] law offices and law firms among whom were former high-ranking
state officials, to fight the charges against him. Also, when he had appeared at
the police interview
with
his attorney, he admitted the verbal sexual harassment he committed on October
15 and the orders he made about bringing the branch—but not any physical
contact, which was the only part subject to criminal punishment.
Besides the harassment
at the golf course and in the car heading back to the city, there was another
charge against him of harassing Ms. Kim at a restaurant they visited for
business purposes. They had then moved from the restaurant to a coffee shop in
order to continue the business meeting. Ms. Kim stated that the perpetrator
touched her thigh under the table [at some point during the meeting]. However, Ms.
Kim and the witness testified differently about the location where the
perpetrator committed the harassment, which put the court into doubt. The
examination of the witness was taking place more than two years after the
incident. An elderly supervisor who verbally abused the employees every day
touched the thigh of a woman employee under the table, and her co-worker saw it.
But isn't it natural that the co-worker cannot remember accurately whether the
table belonged to a restaurant or a coffee shop after as long as two years? The
point should have been the hand on the thigh under the table, nothing else.
Instead, this “restaurant-or-coffee-shop” question became a main issue that eventually
damaged the credibility of the victim's statement.
Ms. Kim was also blamed
for not recording at that moment [at the golf course] with the recording device
she had. How many victims in legal cases record or call for help even if they
have recorders or mobile phones after sensing a looming danger? However, the
legal battle in the first trial resulted in a verdict of not guilty due to lack
of evidence.
At first, hiring an
attorney had seemed unnecessary to Ms. Kim. It might take time, but she
believed that everything would fall into place as it should, and the
perpetrator would get punished. Everyone at work knew the harm she had suffered
and never doubted her. But after the outcome of the first trial, she set out to
find herself a lawyer. That was how Ms. Kim and I met.
At the criminal
appellate trial, I asked the court to give Ms. Kim a second chance to testify.
I submitted an additional piece of evidence—a recording of a phone call between
an executive of the foundation and the perpetrator—which Ms. Kim had failed to
submit before. I also requested the executive be called as a witness. Analyzing a
record of statements that the perpetrator made to the police and a summary of the pleadings of his legal team helped me prepare and submit a
written opinion. The prosecutor of the criminal appellate trial and I shared a
common sentiment that Ms. Kim had been mistreated. We worked hard, but the
result was devastating. Not guilty. It was because even though the court highly
suspected that the defendant did harass the victim, it was not confident enough
to overturn the original ruling. The appellate court’s decision was not
different from the one made by the court of original instance, and the prosecution
did not appeal to the Supreme Court.
The perpetrator’s countersuit for revenge and the victim’s
civil lawsuit
The perpetrator filed a
criminal complaint against not Ms. Kim, which was not surprising, but also the
witnesses who appeared at the criminal trial and testified against him,
claiming they all had falsely accused him and perjured themselves. His lawsuit even
included me, the victim’s attorney at the appellate trial. He argued that I had
tampered with evidence because the transcript of the sound recordings I
submitted at the trial did not have a stenographer’s seal. But the original sound recording had been handed over to the court too—and both of
these were submitted by the prosecutor. Obviously, it was for revenge.
Ms. Kim felt resentment
as well as sadness. It was hard to tolerate the society that exempted the
perpetrator from consequences, the workplace where he came back and strode
around in triumph, and the frustration felt by people in the foundation and the
hospital, who quietly longed for justice. It was much more difficult for her to
bear the reality that she and those who stood beside her got sued and attended
the investigation as defendants.
Citing his illegal acts against
her as grounds, Ms. Kim filed a civil lawsuit against the perpetrator. As the
criminal court had already declared he was innocent, the odds for her to win
the case were as likely as those that of getting blood out of a stone. However,
I could not let her walk that tough road alone. I decided to help her with the
civil lawsuit.
Reality, however, never
allowed us to go our way without a headwind. For some reason, the prosecutor would
not give a “non-prosecution disposition” to the complaint filed by the
perpetrator who accused Ms. Kim and the people around her, including myself,
until Ms. Kim got a judgment from a civil appellate court for her suit. This
does not mean that the prosecutor actually pressed charges against her. After
passing through the police station, the case was stored in a cabinet sitting in
a prosecutor’s office, untouched. In the meantime, we were co-defendants. I was
worried about the possibility of my status as a defendant working against the
victim, so I introduced Ms. Kim to another attorney I knew.
The relief sought was
merely fifty million won, but what Ms. Kim desperately wanted was the judgment
from a civil court that she was right. Unfortunately, the civil court was
indifferent to her due to the criminal court’s acquittal of the perpetrator.
The judges in the first and appellate civil trials did not allow the calling of
witnesses or examinations of the parties involved, and in the end did not
recognize the harm done to the victim, based on lack of evidence. On the day
when the appellate court rendered its ruling, I tried to persuade Ms. Kim not
to appeal to the Supreme Court. I was afraid of the scars that the high, solid
barriers surrounding the court would leave on her. My concern extended to the
financial burden that Ms. Kim could bear in the future, as defeat in a civil
lawsuit in Korea means paying all of the litigation expenses of the respondent.
“Ms. Lee, I want a final
appeal. Don’t even think about cutting your fees. Please don’t give up till the
end.”
Ms. Kim was determined.
So we made a reckless bet by appealing to the Supreme Court.
 |
| A traveling kit, consisting of toothpaste and a toothbrush, from Kim Wonkyeong for people who supported her by joining her on her journey toward justice. She attached a [sticker featuring a] sentence that looks like a logo—“Thank you for your attention and support”—and her smiling face. ⓒKim Wonkyeong |
We didn’t back down
When we met in 2017, Ms.
Kim’s life was hectic with work, a trial against the perpetrator, and pushing
through her early thirties.
Despite the tiring circumstances that allowed her no spare time, she seemed
undaunted. However, after
going through these ordeals in the legal system, her
panic disorder was exacerbated due to the harm from the perpetrator and the
secondary ones they triggered. She had no choice but to resign from the Seoul
National University Children’s Hospital Foundation in the spring of 2021. On
November 25 of that year, at the threshold of winter, the Supreme Court
overturned the lower court’s ruling and remanded her civil case to the court of
original instance, which had dismissed the case by claiming there was no
evidence to prove her victimization. As soon as I heard the Supreme Court’s
decision that day, I ran out of the courtroom, screaming with excitement.
Of course, that was not
the end. We had to go back to the Seoul Central District Court, where we had had
our first trial. It took another year. Ms. Kim testified on the stand. The
defendant did not respond to our request that he take the stand as well. His
attorneys-at-law declined, saying “Seven years have already passed.” In
response, Ms. Kim testified, “I have no reason to avoid examination. I know it’s
not that he didn’t want to, but that he couldn’t [because he’s guilty].” Behind the bar sat Ms. Kim’s mother, interns from my law office, reporters who
had covered the Supreme Court’s remand, and, unprecedentedly, several judicial
researchers. During Ms. Kim’s testimony, someone from the justice department
shed tears.
After the trial [but
before the verdict], Ms. Kim presented a traveling kit consisting of toothpaste
and a toothbrush to us as a reminder of our journey. There was something like a
trademark on the kit. I looked closer and found the sentence “Thank you for
your attention and support” and her smiling face. As we left the court, she
said she wanted to take a photograph in celebration. She held up a banner in
a beautiful color, in the right size. On it was written, “I didn’t back down.”
I almost gave into the tears that I had been holding back in the courtroom. No
one had ever imagined that the lawsuits would continue until 2022. It had taken
us a lot of time to get there. And we also had not expected the overwhelming
moment that could not be expressed other than through the Korean four-character
idiom ‘sapilgwijeong,’ which means “every road leads to justice.”
 |
| After testifying at the post-remand trial, Ms. Kim Wonkyeong stood with her supporters in front of the courthouse. She is in the center, without a mask. ⓒKim Wonkyeong |
The judges at the trial after the remand rendered a decision in January of this year. While doing their best not to come into conflict with the decisions of the criminal courts, they focused on the critical points that could be denied and pronounced that the defendant should recognize Ms. Kim's suffering and pay her ten million won in damages. That scaled-down order showed that the Korean judicial system still has a conservative view on the issue of sexual harassment in the workplace, which left me with a bitter feeling. Still, in that Ms. Kim finally got recognized as the victim, the amount of money awarded is not the only way to measure the value of the ruling. [Through this article] I wanted to create a record about this person who never backed down during a seven-year fight despite suffering from a panic disorder. Her name is Kim Wonkyeong. As her attorney and her co-defendant, I was exhausted and often in pain—but, in the end, happy.
We didn’t back down.
Lee
Eunui became a lawyer after graduating from law school in 2014. She opened “Lee
Eunui Law Firm” right in front of the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office and has
been handling cases of sexual violence and sex discrimination. She is not
dreaming of extraordinary justice or immersive progress in our society, but a
world with common sense, a world where reasonable thoughts and discourse are
valid. She has been on the frontline of a battleground for nine years as a
lawyer and as a writer who has published books such as
Leaving Samsung, It’s Okay to Be Sensitive, Ready to Feel Uncomfortable, and
Gentle Violence.
Original
article: https://www.ildaro.com/9554
No comments:
Post a Comment