Whistleblower wins compensation in #MeToo case against senior Buddhist monk
Court orders compensation for years of sexual harassment, unfair HR move following disclosure
A Seoul court awarded woman who exposed years of sexual harassment by a high-ranking Buddhist monk, and was subjected to disadvantages in personnel decisions afterward, 309.5 million won ($224,700) in compensation.
The Seoul Northern District Court ruled in favor of the victim in a lawsuit against the perpetrator and the Jin-Gak Buddhist Order, which had reassigned her under unjustified circumstances after she came forward.
The court found that the woman faced disadvantageous personnel decisions, including a forced transfer, after revealing the abuse in 2021. In an interview with local broadcaster SBS, she said the monk, who was in his 50s, repeatedly touched her without her consent her after she joined the order in 2017 as a 25-year-old.
A colleague of the victim supported this claim in the same report, saying she was visibly uncomfortable about the accused's physical contact in the office.
After the #Metoo accusation, the order's disciplinary committee initially imposed a five-year suspension on the monk in December of 2021. But the decision was later revoked by the order's leadership, which instead transferred the victim to its Daejeon branch.
Of the court-ordered compensation of 309.5 million won, 100 million won is for the sexual harassment and 200 million won is for the unjust transfer. The remaining amount is to compensate for the therapy and treatment the victim received as a result of the attack.
In November last year, Jin-Gak Order and its human resources official responsible for the problematic transfer were convicted of violating the Sexual Violence Prevention and Victims Protection Act and the Public Interest Whistleblower Protection Act.
The monk was sentenced to 10 months in prison, suspended for two years, in February, and is currently under appellate trial after appealing the ruling.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Korea Herald
3 days ago
- Korea Herald
Whistleblower wins compensation in #MeToo case against senior Buddhist monk
Court orders compensation for years of sexual harassment, unfair HR move following disclosure A Seoul court awarded woman who exposed years of sexual harassment by a high-ranking Buddhist monk, and was subjected to disadvantages in personnel decisions afterward, 309.5 million won ($224,700) in compensation. The Seoul Northern District Court ruled in favor of the victim in a lawsuit against the perpetrator and the Jin-Gak Buddhist Order, which had reassigned her under unjustified circumstances after she came forward. The court found that the woman faced disadvantageous personnel decisions, including a forced transfer, after revealing the abuse in 2021. In an interview with local broadcaster SBS, she said the monk, who was in his 50s, repeatedly touched her without her consent her after she joined the order in 2017 as a 25-year-old. A colleague of the victim supported this claim in the same report, saying she was visibly uncomfortable about the accused's physical contact in the office. After the #Metoo accusation, the order's disciplinary committee initially imposed a five-year suspension on the monk in December of 2021. But the decision was later revoked by the order's leadership, which instead transferred the victim to its Daejeon branch. Of the court-ordered compensation of 309.5 million won, 100 million won is for the sexual harassment and 200 million won is for the unjust transfer. The remaining amount is to compensate for the therapy and treatment the victim received as a result of the attack. In November last year, Jin-Gak Order and its human resources official responsible for the problematic transfer were convicted of violating the Sexual Violence Prevention and Victims Protection Act and the Public Interest Whistleblower Protection Act. The monk was sentenced to 10 months in prison, suspended for two years, in February, and is currently under appellate trial after appealing the ruling.
Korea Herald
10-06-2025
- Korea Herald
Foreperson's complaints signal a divided jury at Harvey Weinstein's retrial
NEW YORK (AP) — The jury foreperson in Harvey Weinstein's sex crimes retrial complained Monday that some jurors were prodding others to change their minds, talking about the former studio boss' past and going beyond the charges as they deliberate. "I feel like they are attacking, talking together, fight together. I don't like it," the foreperson said, according to a transcript of his closed-door conversation with Judge Curtis Farber and the prosecution and defense teams. The foreperson said he believed the jury was tasked only with considering "what happened at the time, in the moment" of the crimes alleged by the prosecution, but others "are pushing people, talking about his past." "I feel it is not fair taking the decision about the past," the foreperson said. He added that others pushed people "to change their minds," when he thought they instead should seek to answer one another's questions and "let that person make a decision." He didn't specify what parts of Weinstein's past came up. An Oscar-winning movie producer, Weinstein was one of Hollywood's most powerful figures until a series of sexual misconduct allegations against him became public in 2017, fueling the #MeToo movement and eventually leading to criminal charges. After hearing from the juror, defense lawyer Arthur Aidala implored Farber to declare a mistrial, calling it a "tainted," "rogue" and "runaway" jury. "People are considering things that were not brought into this trial as evidence," Aidala argued in court without jurors in earshot. "It's not fair. They are talking about the past. It's not about the past." Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo argued that the juror's concerns didn't warrant a mistrial, noting that some aspects of Weinstein's past were allowed into evidence. His accusers were allowed to say they had other unwanted sexual encounters with Weinstein besides those underlying the charges, and they were permitted to mention seeing the groundswell of allegations against Weinstein in the news media in 2017. Farber denied the mistrial request but reminded jurors to weigh only evidence presented during the trial. At the jury's request, he also went over the definition of reasonable doubt and rules about conducting deliberations — requests that suggested they remained far apart on a verdict. Weinstein, 73, has pleaded not guilty to two counts of committing a criminal sex act and one count of rape. The jury of seven women and five men began deliberating on Thursday. Weinstein was originally convicted in New York in 2020 of rape and sexual assault charges involving two women. The verdict was considered a landmark in the #MeToo movement. But the conviction was subsequently overturned, leading to his retrial — with an additional accuser added last year — before a new jury and a different judge. Meanwhile, Weinstein is appealing a 2022 rape conviction in Los Angeles . Just after the New York jurors returned to court Monday, the foreperson sent a note saying he wanted to speak to the judge "about a situation that isn't very good." Farber decided to hear the foreperson's concerns in his robing room, outside the view of reporters, the public and Weinstein, who waived his right to sit in on the discussion. The judge later said he held the conversation in private "solely for purposes of enabling that juror to speak freely." A transcript of the conversation was available later. Yet before the judge and lawyers even had resolved how to address the foreperson's complaint, another juror asked to speak to the court. When brought into court, she volunteered that things were "going well," and "We're making headway." She said the "tone is very different" than on Friday, when still another juror asked to be excused because he felt other jurors were treating one member of the panel in an "unfair and unjust" way. The judge told that juror to keep deliberating and denied a defense request for a mistrial over the issue. After the third juror relayed her impressions Monday, deliberations continued. Jurors asked at one point to re-hear a psychologist's testimony about why sexual assault victims may continue to have relationships with their attackers. They left for the day with a note saying they were "making good progress" and wanted to start off Tuesday by getting copies of emails and other evidence pertaining to one of the three accusers in the case. And, they said, they'd like some coffee. Alas, Farber soon told them, the state court system doesn't provide deliberating jurors with any food or beverage except their daily lunch. "So I'll leave it to the jury to decide how to proceed on that front," he said.
Korea Herald
28-05-2025
- Korea Herald
Man fined for hacking shop displays to show Yoon's photo, insults
Advertising displays carried message 'Just live with it, you dogs and pigs' alongside photo of ex-president A 32-year-old man has been fined 5 million won ($3,640), for hacking into the digital advertisement boards of two stores in Seongnam, Gyeonggi Province, and displaying insulting comments for days. The Seoul Northern District Court on Tuesday found the defendant guilty of interference with business via damage of property, along with violating the Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Information Protection. The defendant surnamed Park hacked into the telecommunications network of a restaurant and a nail polish store in Seongnam on Feb. 2, and displayed his own message on the large boards intended for advertisements. The message said, "Just live with it, you dogs and pigs," alongside a picture of ousted President Yoon Suk Yeol, now under criminal trial for insurrection and abuse of power in connection with his December imposition of martial law. Owners of the two establishments were unable to replace the problematic messages for a while, a full day for the restaurant and six days for the nail polish shop. At the time of the offense, Yoon had been undergoing an impeachment trial for the aforementioned martial law declaration on Dec. 3, and had been under custody for investigation on suspicion of insurrection. "The defendant's crime inflicted substantial damages to the businesses of the victims ... He has not been forgiven or compensated for the damages, but (the court) considered the fact that he has shown remorse for the crime and has no prior criminal records," the court said in its ruling.
