Acquittal in the first trial, conviction in the second and third trials
Sentenced to six months in prison and 40 hours of sexual violence treatment program
A 50-year-old door-to-door vacuum cleaner salesman who was accused of sexually assaulting a woman in her 20s who had requested a vacuum cleaning home service has been found guilty by the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court 1st Division (Chief Judge Oh Kyung-Mi) recently upheld the original sentence of six months in prison and 40 hours of sexual violence treatment program for a salesman in his 50s who was charged with violation of Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes (sexual assault through abuse of occupational authority).
The story related to the verdict was revealed through the JTBC current affairs program on the 5th.
In April 2021, a woman in her 20s requested a home care service from a vacuum cleaner company for cleaning her studio. The home care service involves a company official visiting homes to introduce and demonstrate their vacuum cleaner products for sale.
A few days later, a salesman from the company visited the woman’s home. During the home care service, he offered the woman an experience, claiming he would show her the “hidden features” of the vacuum cleaner.
At the time, the salesman showed her a promotional brochure and claimed that the vacuum cleaner had an air conditioner feature that blew clean air and that massaging with the blowing wind could help with weight loss.
The woman lay on the bed for an experience ended up being sexually assaulted by the salesman for about six minutes. The salesman lifted the woman’s top, pulled down her pants, blew wind from the vacuum cleaner while massaging her stomach with his hand, and put his hand inside her pants and touched her buttocks.
Embarrassed, the woman purchased the vacuum cleaner, which cost 1.89 million won (approximately $1,420), and sent the salesman away from her studio. Later, she called the company’s headquarters to ask if the vacuum cleaner had a massage feature and was told it did not.
It was also revealed that the promotional brochure the salesman had shown to the woman was not produced by the company, but was made by the salesman himself.
The woman immediately got a refund for the vacuum cleaner and reported the salesman to the police. In December of the same year, the salesman was put on trial for violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes.
In court, the salesman argued, “The woman exaggerated and lied to get a refund,” and “Why would she buy the vacuum cleaner if she felt uncomfortable? It was a massage, not sexual assault.”
The court of the first trial accepted the salesman’s argument and acquitted him. The court at the time judged, “He intended to sell the vacuum, and was just explaining that it also had a massage feature,” and “The physical contact was merely a massage.”
However, the appellate court had a different view. After watching the CCTV footage of the two, the appellate court ruled that “the defendant’s actions objectively caused sexual humiliation and disgust, and act against good sexual morals,” and found the salesman guilty.
The Supreme Court also found no mistake in the interpretation of the law in the original judgment and finally confirmed the sentence.
Most Commented