KLAWGURU.COM

Korean Law Demystified!

Arms Over Shoulders at a Company Dinner Is Not Sexual Assault, Court Rules — Twice

By ,

A company executive acquitted at trial of workplace sexual assault charges for putting his arm around a female subordinate’s shoulder and drinking a “love shot” at a company dinner has had that acquittal upheld on appeal. Here are the key points.

Issue

Does an executive’s conduct at a company dinner — putting his arm around a subordinate’s shoulder and drinking interlinked with her — constitute workplace sexual assault under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes, specifically the offense of indecent conduct using workplace authority?

Facts

  • In December 2022, A, an executive at his company, attended a company dinner with subordinate employee B and others. B subsequently filed a complaint alleging A had put his arm around her shoulder and compelled her to engage in a “love shot” — a Korean drinking custom involving linking arms while drinking.
  • A was charged with indecent conduct using workplace authority under the Special Cases Act.

Lower Court Decision

  • The trial court acquitted A on both counts. On the shoulder embrace, it found A had not pressed his body against B or made contact with any sensitive body area — making it difficult to characterize the arm-around-the-shoulder as indecent conduct. On the love shot allegation, the court found the complainant’s own account was inconsistent: the complaint stated A had suddenly grabbed her arm, but B told police during the investigation that she had been the one to take A’s arm first. The inconsistency undermined the reliability of that part of the allegation.

Appellate Court Decision

  • Cheongju District Court upheld the acquittal on appeal.
  • The appellate court added a significant contextual observation: all participants at the dinner had been putting their arms around each other’s shoulders — it was not an act directed specifically at B, and other employees present did not perceive it as sexual or coercive conduct.
  • The court also held that a supervisory relationship alone is insufficient to establish criminal intent for the workplace authority offense. The prosecution must show something more than the existence of a power differential — the specific conduct must itself demonstrate the use of that authority to commit an indecent act.

Key Takeaways

  • Physical contact that does not involve pressing against the body or touching sensitive areas falls below the threshold for indecent conduct under Korean sexual offenses law, even in a workplace context.
  • Where the same conduct was directed at all participants and perceived by others as ordinary social behavior, courts are reluctant to characterize it as sexual or coercive as to one individual.
  • A supervisory relationship creates the context for the workplace authority offense — but it does not by itself establish that any physical contact was committed through the exercise of that authority for a sexual purpose.
  • Inconsistencies between a complainant’s written complaint and subsequent police statement significantly undermine credibility — particularly where the inconsistency goes to who initiated the physical contact.

Why This Matters

This ruling — sustained through two court levels — illustrates the line Korean courts draw between workplace conduct that is uncomfortable, inappropriate, or unwanted and conduct that meets the criminal threshold for indecent assault. Contact that is non-intimate in nature, directed at multiple people in a social setting, and perceived as ordinary by others present will face a high bar before courts treat it as criminal assault, even where a supervisory relationship exists. For workplace compliance practitioners, the outcome does not mean that arm-around-the-shoulder conduct at company events is always acceptable — it may still violate internal harassment policies or create civil liability — but it confirms that not every unwelcome social contact at a work dinner constitutes criminal sexual assault under Korean law.

Article: https://www.mt.co.kr/society/2026/09/28/2026092818065747945

Leave a Reply