Stalking Punishment Act Defense Lawyer
Stalking Punishment Act Defense Lawyer | Contesting the elements and responding to restrictions already imposed
The Act on Punishment of Stalking Crimes (스토킹처벌법) criminalizes repeated or continuous conduct that causes anxiety or fear by approaching, following, or contacting a specific person against their will (스토킹처벌법 제2조). Whether a given act qualifies as "stalking conduct" and whether it was "repeated" are frequently contested legal questions, not obvious facts. Once a report is filed, police or courts can impose provisional measures (경찰 긴급응급조치, 법원 잠정조치) restricting contact, approach, or even detaining the accused before any conviction, so how you respond in the first 48-72 hours matters.
Stalking Punishment Act Defense | What Legally Counts as 'Stalking Conduct'
Not every unwanted message or repeated encounter automatically qualifies as a stalking crime. The statute defines specific categories of conduct, and each element can be challenged depending on the facts.
This covers physically approaching, waiting near, or blocking the movement of the other person near their home, workplace, school, or other frequented places. Whether the location was genuinely tied to the victim's routine, and whether contact was coincidental or deliberate, is often disputed.
Loitering near a residence, dormitory, workplace, or vehicle can qualify even without direct contact. Defense often focuses on whether the accused had an independent, legitimate reason to be present in that location.
Repeated phone calls, texts, social media messages, or sending unwanted letters/gifts through mail, information networks, or third parties can fall under this category (스토킹처벌법 제2조 제1호). A single message following a breakup, for example, is often argued not to meet the 'repeated' threshold on its own.
Placing items at the person's door, leaving notes, or damaging belongings near their residence is a separate category. Ownership disputes over shared property (e.g., ex-partners) frequently complicate this element.
A single stalking act is not itself the 'stalking crime' punished under Article 18; the conduct must be repeated or continuous against the same person (스토킹처벌법 제2조 제2호, 제18조). This is usually the most contested element in accused-side cases: how many incidents, over what time span, and whether they form a continuous pattern rather than isolated events.
Consent and 'against the victim's will'
The statute requires the conduct to be against the other person's explicit or implied will. Prior relationship history, mixed signals, or continued contact initiated by the other party can be relevant to this element, though courts weigh this carefully and inconsistent contact history alone rarely negates a finding of stalking.
Stalking Punishment Act Defense | Provisional and Emergency Measures Before Any Trial
One of the most distinctive features of stalking cases is that restrictions can be imposed on the accused very early, based only on a report and preliminary review, before any finding of guilt.
Emergency measures by police (긴급응급조치)
If police determine there is an urgent risk of repeat stalking, they can immediately order the accused to stay at least 100 meters away from the victim or to cease electronic contact, without prior court approval (스토킹처벌법 제4조). This can be issued on the same day as a report, often based only on the victim's statement.
Provisional measures by court (잠정조치)
At the prosecutor's request, a court can order stronger provisional measures, including a written warning, no-contact orders, or, in serious cases, detention at a detention facility for up to one month (스토킹처벌법 제9조). These require a court decision but move on a compressed timeline compared to a normal criminal trial.
Objecting to a measure already issued
An accused person subject to a provisional measure can file an objection (이의신청) or request modification/revocation through the issuing court or agency. Building a written record of compliance and preparing a factual rebuttal early is often more effective than waiting for the main criminal proceeding to address the underlying facts.
Violating a measure is itself a separate crime
Breaching an emergency or provisional measure carries its own penalty, separate from the underlying stalking allegation (스토킹처벌법 제20조). Even incidental or accidental contact during a no-contact period can trigger a new charge, so understanding the exact scope of the order matters as much as contesting the original allegation.
Stalking Punishment Act Defense | Contesting Whether the Conduct Meets the Statutory Definition
In most accused-side cases, the real dispute is not whether contact happened, but whether that contact legally qualifies as stalking under the Act's specific definitions.
Was there a legitimate reason for contact?
Contact for a genuine, ongoing purpose (dividing shared property, co-parenting arrangements, workplace matters, returning belongings) can be distinguished from conduct aimed at causing anxiety or fear. Documenting the practical necessity of each contact is central to this argument.
Did the conduct reach the 'repeated or continuous' threshold?
A single incident, or isolated incidents separated by long gaps with no pattern, may not satisfy the repetition element required for the crime under Article 18, even if individual conduct might fit a category listed in Article 2(1). Timeline reconstruction — dates, locations, and the gap between incidents — is often the single most important piece of evidence in these cases.
Was it truly 'against the other person's will'?
If the other party previously invited contact, responded to messages, or maintained a relationship where boundaries were unclear or inconsistently communicated, this can be relevant to whether the conduct was against their will. However, once a clear rejection has been communicated, continued contact is difficult to defend regardless of prior history.
Did the conduct actually cause anxiety or fear?
The statute requires the conduct to cause anxiety or fear (불안감 또는 공포심) in the other person, which is assessed based on both subjective impact and objective circumstances. Evidence about the nature of the relationship and how the other party responded at the time can be relevant to this element.
⚠ Provisional measure deadlines run on their own clock
An objection to an emergency or provisional measure must generally be filed promptly through the proper channel, and detention-type provisional measures have their own statutory duration limits and extension procedures. Missing the window to object does not resolve the underlying criminal case, but it can mean living under restrictions for longer than necessary.
Stalking Punishment Act Defense | From Report to Resolution
Once a stalking report is filed, police may interview the accused and can issue an emergency measure (100m no-contact, no electronic contact) within days, sometimes before formal questioning even occurs.
Police investigate the alleged incidents and refer the case to the prosecutor, who may separately request a court-ordered provisional measure if risk factors are present. This stage is where an early written response or objection can matter.
The prosecutor decides whether to indict, offer a summary indictment, or dispose of the case without indictment. Whether the elements of Article 2 are met, and any voluntary compliance with prior measures, are typically weighed at this stage.
If indicted, the case proceeds to trial where the specific elements of the offense (repetition, unwanted contact, resulting anxiety) are contested. Settlement discussions or evidence about the actual relationship history are often introduced here.
A conviction can carry a criminal record and, depending on severity, may affect eligibility for certain employment or licenses. If measures remain in place, compliance monitoring can continue even after the criminal case concludes.
Stalking Punishment Act Defense | How Fees Are Typically Structured
Calculated based on case stage (pre-indictment review vs. post-indictment trial defense), complexity of the factual dispute over the elements, and whether a provisional measure objection must be filed urgently alongside the main case.
May apply depending on case outcome (non-indictment, reduced charge, acquittal, or measure revocation), structured as a separate agreement from the retainer and discussed only after reviewing the specific facts.
Objecting to an emergency or provisional measure often requires drafting and filing within a short window, which can be billed separately from the main case retainer given the compressed timeline involved.
Covers court filing fees, document certification costs, and expenses for obtaining call/message records or CCTV footage relevant to reconstructing the timeline of contact.
※ Costs vary depending on case complexity and specific circumstances; exact fees will be provided during consultation. No specific outcome is guaranteed.
Stalking Punishment Act Defense | Self-Check Before Your First Meeting with Counsel
1️⃣ If You Just Received a Report Notice
- Have you received a summons or phone call from police, and do you know the exact date of the alleged incidents?
- Do you have a record (texts, call logs, messenger history) of every contact you had with the other person?
- Is there a legitimate reason (shared property, custody, workplace) that explains why you contacted them?
- Have you avoided any further contact with the other person since being notified of the report?
2️⃣ If an Emergency or Provisional Measure Has Been Issued
- Do you know the exact scope of the order — distance restriction, no electronic contact, or detention?
- Have you kept written proof of your compliance (e.g., call logs showing no outgoing calls) since the order was issued?
- Do you understand the deadline for filing an objection to the measure?
- Has any contact occurred, even accidental, since the order took effect?
3️⃣ Building the Timeline for Your Defense
- Can you list every alleged contact incident by date, and the actual gap in days between each one?
- For each incident, do you have an independent explanation unrelated to causing anxiety or fear?
- Did the other party ever initiate contact or respond positively after an alleged incident?
- Do you have any witnesses who can describe the actual nature of your relationship with the other person?
