▲ Inter-floor noise
Individuals who pounded on their ceiling with a backscratcher to protest inter-floor noise and repeatedly sent threatening text messages demanding a lodging refund, while claiming their actions were "legitimate," have both been punished for stalking.
Judge Koh Bum-jin of Criminal Division 2 at the Chuncheon District Court announced on August 31 that A, a 55-year-old indicted for violating the Act on Punishment of Stalking Crimes, was sentenced to a fine of 2 million won and ordered to complete 40 hours of a stalking treatment program.
A was put on trial on charges of stalking, having used a backscratcher to repeatedly strike the ceiling multiple times and calling via intercom on nine occasions over a period of about two months starting March 17 of last year, under the pretext that noise was coming from the upstairs unit.
Beginning in January of last year, A repeatedly called the upstairs victim via intercom to demand caution against inter-floor noise, even though the victim had already expressed intent to be careful.
Despite receiving a request from the victim asking, "If inter-floor noise occurs, please contact us through the management office," A continued to pound with the backscratcher.
In court, A argued that this was "a legitimate action within a reasonable scope according to social norms to seek solutions for inter-floor noise," but the court ruled that it constituted stalking acts sufficient to cause anxiety or fear.
Judge Koh explained the sentencing reasoning, stating, "The victim's family members are believed to have felt considerable anxiety due to the defendant's actions," adding, "Since the defendant has finished moving out after the incident, the risk of inter-floor noise disputes with the victim appears to have been resolved."
Judge Koh also sentenced B, a 69-year-old indicted for violating the Stalking Punishment Act and making threats, to a fine of 1 million on and an order to complete 40 hours of a stalking treatment program.
In March 2023, B canceled a reservation at a lodging operated by the victim via an accommodation platform, but failed to receive a full refund due to the refund policy, leading B to demand a cancellation of the payment.
When the victim did not comply, B sent 24 text messages over about two months, including statements such as "You picked the wrong person."
Some of the messages contained threats that B would file complaints with related agencies such as the Korea Consumer Agency.
B claimed in court that "there was no intent to stalk or threaten," but the argument was not accepted.
Judge Koh ruled, "The appropriateness of the means and methods of the defendant's crime is not recognized, and the victim is deemed to have felt considerable anxiety and fear."
(Photo: Yonhap News)
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.