Court recognizes misogyny as motive for hate crime for 1st time

Advocacy groups praise landmark ruling, disappointed by mental state mitigation

Women's advocacy groups in South Gyeongsang Province, including the Gyeongnam Women's Association, hold a press conference Tuesday to express their stance following the Changwon District Court's ruling in a case where a female convenience store clerk was assaulted for having short hair. (Yonhap)

An appellate court ruled Tuesday that the assault on a female convenience store clerk by a man in Jinju, South Gyeongsang Province, allegedly motivated by her short haircut, constituted a misogynistic hate crime. The landmark ruling is the first time a Korean court has explicitly recognized misogyny as a condemnable motive in a criminal case.

The Changwon District Court upheld the lower court's decision to put the attacker behind bars for three years for aggravated assault, destruction of property and obstruction of business. He was found guilty of attacking a female clerk and another man in his 50s who tried to intervene. Unlike the lower court's decision, the judges at the appellate court stated in the ruling that the misogynistic nature of the assault was a key factor.

The attack took place at a convenience store in Hadae-dong, Jinju, in November 2023. The defendant suspected the clerk to be a "feminist" based on her short hair, and reportedly said, "Feminists should be beaten up." The female victim sustained serious injuries including permanent impairment of her hearing, while the male victim also sustained heavy injuries and quit his job due to trauma.

"The defendant's actions were rooted in baseless hatred and bias against women," the court said. "The defendant repeatedly declared 'feminists deserve to be hit' while attacking the female clerk and questioned the intervening male victim by asking, 'Why aren't you siding with a fellow man?' indicating a misogynistic motive."

However, the appellate court also denied the prosecution's appeals to sentence him to five years in prison, saying that it failed to prove the accused was not in an unstable mental state at the time of the attack.

Women's advocacy groups praised the court's decision to define the case as South Korea's "first misogynistic hate crime," but expressed disappointment that the defendant's unstable mental state was considered a mitigating factor in the ruling.

"It raises questions about why mental health issues should reduce the punishment severity for such egregious acts," said Kang Kyung-min, the president of the Jinju Sexual Violence Counseling Center. "Individuals have a responsibility to manage their mental and physical health. Why should an unstable mental state be a mitigating factor in sentencing?"

By Lee Jaeeun(jenn@heraldcorp.com)