Stalking Act | A Case Charged Over Workplace Contact, Concluded With a Non-Prosecution Decision

The key issues in this case were
① whether the contact in question constituted "continuous and repeated conduct" under the Stalking Act,
② whether the content of the contact induced anxiety or fear in the other party, and
③ whether intent or willful negligence on the part of the client was recognized.

The attorney specializing in criminal matters closely reviewed the content, frequency, and timing of the contact, and set as the key issue the question of whether the messages and calls in question constituted continuous and repeated conduct that induces anxiety or fear.

Emphasizing that these were simply greetings asking after the other party's well-being or conversations of a work-related nature, the attorney argued that the conduct requirement under the Stalking Act was not satisfied.

The attorney specializing in criminal matters described in detail in the defense counsel's opinion that not even willful negligence was established, on the grounds that the client immediately ceased contact and deleted the contact information after clearly recognizing the refusal, and that there was no contact of any kind thereafter.

The defense organized in specific terms and submitted to the investigative agency the facts that the client was a first-time offender, was the head of a household supporting a young child, and was scheduled for an overseas assignment, so that the possibility of physical re-contact was markedly low.

In addition, reflecting the client's intention to apologize to the victim and a sincere attitude of not wishing to escalate the matter, the defense emphasized that criminal punishment was unnecessary.

A charge of violating the Stalking Act is judged not simply on whether contact occurred, but on a combination of factors, such as the context and content of the contact and whether the person recognized the other party's refusal.

In particular, because it is not a crime not punishable against the victim's will, the investigation may proceed even if the victim does not wish for punishment, so the importance of an early response is very great.

The attorneys specializing in criminal matters at Daeryun Law Firm provide assistance through a strategy tailored to the criteria applied by investigative agencies, including a detailed legal review of whether the constituent elements are met, a demonstration of the absence of intent and willful negligence, and the organization of grounds showing that the likelihood of reoffending is foreclosed.

If you are facing an investigation on a charge of violating the Stalking Act, an early response can change the outcome.

If you need the assistance of an expert, we encourage you to seek help at any time through the 🔗legal consultation booking with Daeryun Law Firm.

Under the Stalking Act, a charge may be recognized based on simple contact or approach alone, so establishing an accurate response strategy is more important than anything.

This is because a casually sent text message, a messenger record, or one's route home from work may give rise to a misunderstanding, and the other party's statement and feelings can have a significant influence on the early judgment in the investigation.

The following response measures play a very important role in actual cases.

Organizing the above items in advance can reduce unnecessary misunderstanding during the investigative agency's interrogation and strengthen the defense reasoning in the assessment of intent and repetition.