hankyoreh

Members of women‘s groups hold a demonstration on the stairs of the Sejong Center for the Performing Arts in central Seoul

After a South Korean military court recently convicted a captain for having sexual relations with soldiers of the same sex, the Hankyoreh confirmed that the sexual acts that served as the grounds for the conviction were consensual. This contradicts a statement released to the media shortly after the court’s decision in which the Ministry of National Defense said that the captain, identified by the surname Lee, had “molested his subordinates on several occasions,” creating the impression that he had exploited his position and power to force subordinates to have sex with him. The Center for Military Human Rights, Korea (MHRK) is preparing a lawsuit, describing the Ministry‘s statement as “clearly representing the dissemination of false information.”

According to the formal charges against Lee by military prosecutors that were reviewed by the Hankyoreh on May 28, Lee was charged with having sexual relations four times with three soldiers of the same sex between June 2016 and the end of Oct. 2016. Lee met these other individuals on websites and apps frequented by homosexuals. Lee’s dating partners had the ranks of sergeant, lieutenant and staff sergeant. All of them were lower in rank than Lee, but he did not use his rank to arrange the dates.

After the military court found Lee guilty on May 24, the Defense Ministry told the media that “the court concluded that [Lee] had degraded military discipline by molesting his subordinates inside the barracks while on duty,” creating the impression that Lee had taken advantage of his higher rank to force subordinates to have sexual relations with him. But the formal charges against Lee only state that he had sexual intercourse in motels with soldiers who had voluntarily met him on an app for homosexuals, and there was no evidence that he forced them to do so against their will. But the military prosecutors categorized all these actions as “molestation” in their indictment of Lee. Article 92-6 of the Military Criminal Act, which states that someone who “commits anal intercourse with” or otherwise molests a soldier, civilian employee of the military or military cadet “shall be punished by imprisonment with labor for not more than two years,” was used as the grounds for interpreting consensual gay sex as “molestation.” For the Ministry to nevertheless explain that the military court had also acknowledged this as “molestation” is very misleading, some say.

Another controversial point was the Ministry‘s reference to Lee committing these acts while “on duty,” because one of the four sexual encounters occurred during lunch. “Lee spent some private time in the barracks during lunch, when he was on break, but this is being portrayed as deviant behavior while on duty,” said Kang Seok-min, the lawyer defending Lee. The other three sexual encounters occurred off the base, while Lee was off duty.

During a telephone interview with the Hankyoreh on May 28, a military source said that the phrase “molested subordinates on several occasions” had been used because “gay sex was ’molestation‘ according to the Military Criminal Act.” This official also said that “in the army, you’re on duty even at lunchtime.”

“The army is spreading rumors about Lee. We‘re going to file charges against them for defamation,” MHRK said.

By Heo Jae-hyun, staff reporter

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]