Who is ‘implementation of justice’ for without victim’s consent?

One of the videos posted by the YouTube channel \'Naraack Archive\' revealing the identity of the perpetrators of the \'Milyang mass sexual assault case\'. YouTube capture

A YouTuber who drew attention with a video that revealed the identities of the perpetrators of the “gang rape case in Miryang” in 2004 claimed to get “permission from the victim,” but it was found to be different from the fact. The YouTuber uploaded the video without asking the victim's opinion or seeking her consent. Although the cause of "for the victim" was put forward, her opinion was ignored and the YouTuber has been criticized for capitalizing on public sentiment. The YouTuber also created new victims by disclosing information without verification.

The YouTube channel “Naraack Archive” posted a video on June 1 claiming that the ringleader of the gang rape case worked at a restaurant. After the video went viral, the YouTuber posted a series of videos about the identities of other perpetrators. “There are many questions about whether I asked the victim's permission, but I talked to the victim's family directly by email and decided to release the identities of all 44 (perpetrators),” the YouTuber wrote on a YouTube community.

The Korea Sexual Violence Relief Center, which has been supporting the victim, responded on June 5, saying, “The victim and her family never agreed to upload the videos disclosing the identities of the perpetrators.” It added, “We are embarrassed and concerned by the unilateral posting of the videos and the number of views, which is far from the victim's daily recovery and respect for her opinions.” The YouTube channel edited the post to remove the content of “getting permission from the victim” and then deleted it early on the 6th.

The videos have brought the horrific crime of 20 years ago back into the public spotlight, and as related videos and information about the incident spread online, concerns about secondary harm have grown. This is because attention to the case focuses only on the atrocity and lax punishment of the crime rather than on the recovery and relief of the victim, and prevention of recurrence of such crimes. The case is being consumed as a kind of “criminal content.”

“Victims have no control over the content and the impact by the third-party’s punishment to perpetrators. In this situation, victims feel helpless that their voices are not heard,” said Kim Hye-jeong, director of the Korea Sexual Violence Relief Center. Yoon Jeong-sook, a senior researcher at the Korea Institute of Criminology, said, "After the incident, the victim must have made a difficult effort to recover from the damage," adding, "Suddenly exposing the victim to incident information at an unwanted time can have adverse effects, such as reigniting trauma."

“After the incident, the victim may have been working hard to recover from the damage,” said Jung-sook Yoon, a senior research fellow at the Korea Institute for Criminal Justice and Public Policy, “and suddenly exposing her to case information at an unwanted time can have adverse effects, such as reigniting trauma.”

Behind the "implementation of justice without victims’ consent" lies the pursuit of private interests. Kwon Kim Hyun-young, director of the Women's Reality Research Institute, said, "There are many cases where people try to make a profit by pretending to help victims and get their consent," adding, "The problem is that they try to gain financial profits with the victims in the first place."

A person unrelated to the case was named as the perpetrator. Ms. A said that she suffered damage as other YouTubers came to her workplace, after Naraack Archive pointed her out as a related person of the perpetrators. “I am not the girlfriend of a perpetrator and the witch hunt is still going on,” she wrote in a post on a parenting community, “I will file a complaint and take legal action.” The YouTuber admitted his wrongdoing.

The dangers of unverified disclosures of information have been highlighted in this case. “Unconfirmed information is being circulated wildly as YouTubers share raw and unverified information,” said Han Min-kyung, a professor at the National Police University. “There is a risk that false information could spread and create other victims or leak the victims’ information.”

In 2020, a website called “Digital Prison,” which randomly disclosed the identities of alleged sex offenders, posted the information of an innocent citizen, causing him to commit suicide. Regarding the "Seoul National University Deepfake sextortion Case," there was also a request not to upload posts that infer the identity of the perpetrator online. This was out of concern that the victim's identity could be revealed if the perpetrator's identity spreads.

The more high-profile the case, the more “third-party punishment,.” such as doxing, are rampant. This is because, in addition to the public's curiosity about high-profile cases, there is a consensus that punishment for the perpetrators is too weak.

The gang rape case in Miryang, for example, drew public attention because the perpetrators’ proper reflection and apology were not made,” Kwon Kim said. “It is noteworthy that people are angry about the lack of justice at the time of the incident.”

However, it is pointed out that interest should not remain only in “revenge.” Discussions should lead to supporting victims and strengthening punishment within the judicial system, not private retaliation. “Reprisal is not justice,” said Yoon. "The first priority is to properly punish perpetrators and protect victims with state power and law."

※This article has undergone review by a professional translator after being translated by an AI translation tool.