The Supreme Court has ruled that merely carrying a weapon in public after being assaulted by a neighbor does not constitute a violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violent Acts, etc.
According to legal circles on Tuesday (June 30), the Second Division of the Supreme Court (Justice Kwon Young-jun presiding) overturned the original verdict that sentenced a 65-year-old individual, identified as A, to one year in prison for charges including assault, property damage, trespassing, and violating the Act on the Punishment of Violent Acts (as a potential offender). The case has been remanded to the Jeonju District Court.
A was indicted for violating the Act on the Punishment of Violent Acts after wandering around the neighborhood with a kitchen knife in July 2024, following an incident where A was assaulted by a neighbor, B, and sustained a head injury.
A was also charged with assaulting their sister-in-law in May of that year for refusing to provide financial assistance, and for throwing and breaking a jar lid belonging to her.
In the first and second trials, all charges against A were recognized as guilty, resulting in a one-year prison sentence.
B, who was indicted for special injury, received a one-year prison sentence suspended for two years and did not appeal, finalizing the sentence.
In the final appeal filed by A, the Supreme Court determined that the charge of violating the Act on the Punishment of Violent Acts had not been proven.
Article 7 of the Act on the Punishment of Violent Acts (concerning potential offenders) stipulates that any person who carries, provides, or brokers a weapon or other dangerous object that is likely to be used for crimes defined under the Act without a justifiable reason shall be punished by imprisonment for up to three years or a fine of up to 3 million won.
The Supreme Court explained, "In this clause, 'carrying' a dangerous object refers to possessing it with the intent to use it at a crime scene," adding, "The mere fact of possession cannot be presumed to mean there is a risk of it being used for crimes defined under the Act on the Punishment of Violent Acts."
The Supreme Court stated that the indictment contained no information regarding which specific crime under the Act A intended to commit by carrying the kitchen knife, and that A had not made any statements regarding such intent from the investigation stage through the second trial. Therefore, the court concluded, "It cannot be seen as proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant carried a dangerous object likely to be used for crimes defined under the Act on the Punishment of Violent Acts."
Because the second trial had treated the violation of the Act on the Punishment of Violent Acts as a concurrent offense with the other guilty charges and issued a single sentence, the Supreme Court overturned the entire second-instance judgment and ordered a retrial.
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.