Chuncheon Law Firm | A Client Charged with Insult of a Superior Officer Receives a Suspension of Sentencing

🔗Insult of a superior officer is, as the term indicates, an offense committed by a person who insults a superior officer.

In the context of insult of a superior officer, a superior officer means a person who holds the power of command in a relationship of command and obedience.

Insult of a superior officer is committed when a person insults a superior officer to the officer's face, or when a person insults a superior officer by displaying a document, drawing, or effigy, or by a speech or any other public method.

Insult of a superior officer is regarded as an act that undermines the hierarchical order of the military organization, and severe punishment is imposed for it.

A person who insults a superior officer to the officer's face is subject to imprisonment with or without labor for not more than two years, and a person who insults a superior officer by displaying a document, drawing, or effigy, or by a speech or any other public method, is subject to imprisonment with or without labor for not more than three years.

Because insult of a superior officer under the Military Criminal Act is punishable by imprisonment with or without labor and carries no fine, a person who is indicted and convicted receives at minimum a suspended sentence of imprisonment.

The Chuncheon Law Firm argued that the client was deeply remorseful.

The remarks the client made were impulsive and occurred only once.

The Chuncheon Law Firm emphasized that the client, who had enlisted only a short time earlier, did not fully understand the seriousness of insult of a superior officer and had made an impulsive mistake, and it stressed that the client now recognized the wrongdoing and was deeply remorseful.

The Chuncheon Law Firm requested leniency for the future of the client, a young man faithfully performing his military service for the country.

The client is a young man who dreams of becoming a public official in order to serve the country.

The Chuncheon Law Firm emphasized that any further punishment would restrict the client in various respects, such as eligibility to apply for public office, and that it would be unjust for a young client with a bright future to be deprived of many opportunities.

The Chuncheon Law Firm argued that, under Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act, when a sentence of imprisonment with or without labor for not more than one year, suspension of qualifications, or a fine is to be imposed, the court may suspend the pronouncement of the sentence if there are notable signs of contrition, taking into account the age, conduct, environment, relationship with the victim, motive for the offense, means and result, and circumstances after the offense.

The client has completed the training center period during which the offense occurred, has been assigned to a field unit, and has faithfully performed his military service to this point.

The Chuncheon Law Firm emphasized that everyone around the client who knew of his diligent conduct was appealing for leniency on his behalf.

The Chuncheon Law Firm requested leniency, emphasizing that the client was sincerely remorseful, was faithfully carrying out his military service, was a first-time offender, faced various disadvantages such as restrictions on eligibility to apply for public office if a suspended sentence of imprisonment without labor or heavier were finalized given his young age, and had petitions of support from those around him.

The Chuncheon Law Firm requested a judgment of suspension of sentencing for the client, relying on cases in which a suspension of sentencing had been pronounced under similar circumstances.