Open Decision Ledger · Criminal law
Hiring-process influence as a protective or supervisory relationship
Supreme Court, July 9, 2020, 2020Do5646 (judgment)
Case name: 성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(업무상위력등에의한추행)
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Does Article 10(1) of the Special Act on the Punishment etc. of Sexual Crimes, which covers a person under the offender's protection or supervision by reason of work, employment or other relationship, include a person within the offender's sphere of influence during a hiring process, and what does 'power' mean and by what standard is a molestation committed by power judged?
Holding
Yes. A person under protection or supervision in the workplace and in practice, and a person within the sphere of influence in a hiring process, are both covered. 'Power' means force sufficient to overcome the victim's free will; it may be physical or non-physical, may consist of assault or threats or of the use of social, economic or political status or authority, and the victim's will need not in fact have been overcome. Whether molestation was committed by power is judged by weighing together the nature and degree of the physical force used, the kind of status or authority held, the victim's age, the relationship between them, how the act came about, the concrete form of the act and the circumstances at the time.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
‘업무, 고용이나 그 밖의 관계로 인하여 자기의 보호, 감독을 받는 사람’에는 직장 안에서 보호 또는 감독을 받거나 사실상 보호 또는 감독을 받는 상황에 있는 사람뿐만 아니라 채용 절차에서 영향력의 범위 안에 있는 사람도 포함된다.
Unofficial English translation
The phrase 'a person under one's protection or supervision by reason of work, employment, or any other relationship' includes not only a person who is protected or supervised in the workplace or is in a situation of being de facto protected or supervised, but also a person who is within the scope of one's influence in a hiring procedure.
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed.
Form of the test
Circumstances weighed Stated in the decision
위력으로써 추행하였는지는 행사한 유형력의 내용과 정도, 행위자의 지위나 권세의 종류, 피해자의 연령, 행위자와 피해자의 관계, 그 행위에 이르게 된 경위, 구체적인 행위 모습, 범행 당시의 정황 등 여러 사정을 종합적으로 고려하여 판단하여야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
Whether an indecent act was committed by means of power must be determined by comprehensively considering various circumstances such as the content and degree of the coercive force exercised, the type of the actor's status or authority, the victim's age, and the relationship between the actor and the victim, the circumstances that led to the act, the specific manner of the act, and the circumstances at the time of the offense.
Factors
- 행사한 유형력의 내용과 정도
- 행위자의 지위나 권세의 종류
- 피해자의 연령, 행위자와 피해자의 관계
- 그 행위에 이르게 된 경위
- 구체적인 행위 모습, 범행 당시의 정황 등 여러 사정을 종합적으로 고려하여 판단하여야 한다
Unofficial English translation
• the content and degree of the coercive force exercised
• the type of the actor's status or authority
• the victim's age, and the relationship between the actor and the victim
• the circumstances that led to the act
• It must be determined by comprehensively considering various circumstances such as the specific manner of the act and the circumstances at the time of the offense
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 1998. 1. 23. 선고 97도2506 판결(공1998상, 644)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 97Do2506 decided January 23, 1998 (Gong 1998 Sang, 644)
Decisions referred to
[1] 대법원 1976. 2. 10. 선고 74도1519 판결(공1976, 9013), 대법원 1998. 1. 23. 선고 97도2506 판결(공1998상, 644), 대법원 2001. 10. 30. 선고 2001도4085 판결, 대법원 2019. 9. 9. 선고 2019도2562 판결
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
How much real influence over a hiring decision must a person hold before a candidate in the recruitment process is a person under that person's protection or supervision?
A later decision addressing influence in a hiring process where the authority was shared or already exhausted would require this entry to be read again. An amendment to Article 10 of the Special Act on the Punishment etc. of Sexual Crimes would do the same.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-25
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 7 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “How much real influence over a hiring decision must a person hold before a candidate in the recruitment process is a person under that person's protection or supervision?” vs Independent “When does an applicant cease to fall within an employer's influence after the recruitment process ends?”
The primary asks how much real influence over hiring a person must hold, while the independent asks when the applicant leaves the employer's influence after recruitment ends, so one concerns degree and the other timing.
‘업무, 고용이나 그 밖의 관계로 인하여 자기의 보호, 감독을 받는 사람’에는 직장 안에서 보호 또는 감독을 받거나 사실상 보호 또는 감독을 받는 상황에 있는 사람뿐만 아니라 채용 절차에서 영향력의 범위 안에 있는 사람도 포함된다.Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Changwon District Court, sitting on appeal, in its judgment of 21 April 2020 (2019No2562), found that the defendant, the owner of a convenience store, called out the victim, who had contacted him after seeing his part-time help-wanted advertisement, on the pretext of hiring the victim, held an interview at a bar to confirm the victim's intention, then lured the victim to the defendant's home, where the defendant touched the victim's genitalia and had the victim touch the defendant's. It held that the defendant molested the victim by using his position holding the authority to hire to overcome the victim's free will.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found no error. It held that the appellate reasoning was based on the law stated above, and that the court below had not misapprehended the law on who is a person under protection or supervision by reason of work, employment or other relationship, or on the meaning of 'power'. The four Justices unanimously dismissed the defendant's appeal.
Distinguishing conditions
- A person outside the hiring authority's sphere of influence, so that no employment or other relationship of protection or supervision existed at the time of the act.
- Force that falls short of power sufficient to overcome the victim's free will, such as conduct without assault, threats or the use of status or authority.
- Sexual touching that did not proceed from the use of the hiring position, so that the free will was not overcome by that position.
Record verification notes
First establish that the accused held real authority over the hiring and that the victim was within its sphere at the time, since the decision rests on that position. Then gather the circumstances the Court listed: the nature and degree of force, the kind of authority, the victim's age, the relationship, how the act came about, its concrete form and the surroundings at the time, and weigh them together.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] ‘업무상 위력 등에 의한 추행’에 관한 처벌 규정인 성폭력범죄의 처벌 등에 관한 특례법 제10조 제1항에서 정한 ‘업무, 고용이나 그 밖의 관계로 인하여 자기의 보호, 감독을 받는 사람’에 직장 안에서 보호 또는 감독을 받거나 사실상 보호 또는 감독을 받는 상황에 있는 사람뿐만 아니라 채용 절차에서 영향력의 범위 안에 있는 사람도 포함되는지 여부(적극) / 위 죄에서 말하는 ‘위력’의 의미 및 위력으로써 추행하였는지 판단하는 기준 [2] 편의점 업주인 피고인이 아르바이트 구인 광고를 보고 연락한 갑을 채용을 빌미로 불러내 면접을 한 후 자신의 집으로 유인하여 갑의 성기를 만지고 갑에게 피고인의 성기를 만지게 하였다고 하여 성폭력범죄의 처벌 등에 관한 특례법 위반(업무상위력등에의한추행)으로 기소된 사안에서, 피고인이 채용 권한을 가지고 있는 지위를 이용하여 갑의 자유의사를 제압하여 갑을 추행하였다고 본 원심판단이 정당하다고 한 사례
Unofficial English translation
[1] Whether the phrase 'a person under one's protection or supervision by reason of work, employment, or any other relationship' in Article 10 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, which prescribes the punishment for 'indecent act by coercion, etc. in the course of work,' includes not only a person who is protected or supervised in the workplace or is in a situation of being de facto protected or supervised, but also a person who is within the scope of one's influence in a hiring procedure (affirmative) / The meaning of 'power' referred to in the said crime and the criteria for determining whether an indecent act was committed by means of such power [2] In a case where the defendant, the owner of a convenience store, was prosecuted for a violation of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes (indecent act by coercion, etc. in the course of work) on the ground that, after A contacted the defendant upon seeing a part-time job recruitment advertisement, the defendant summoned A under the pretext of hiring A, conducted an interview, lured A to the defendant's home, touched A's genitals, and made A touch the defendant's genitals, a case holding that the judgment of the court below was correct in finding that the defendant, using the position of holding hiring authority, suppressed A's free will and committed an indecent act against A
Summary of the holding
[1] 성폭력범죄의 처벌 등에 관한 특례법 제10조는 ‘업무상 위력 등에 의한 추행’에 관한 처벌 규정인데, 제1항에서 “업무, 고용이나 그 밖의 관계로 인하여 자기의 보호, 감독을 받는 사람에 대하여 위계 또는 위력으로 추행한 사람은 3년 이하의 징역 또는 1천 500만 원 이하의 벌금에 처한다.”라고 정하고 있다. ‘업무, 고용이나 그 밖의 관계로 인하여 자기의 보호, 감독을 받는 사람’에는 직장 안에서 보호 또는 감독을 받거나 사실상 보호 또는 감독을 받는 상황에 있는 사람뿐만 아니라 채용 절차에서 영향력의 범위 안에 있는 사람도 포함된다. 그리고 ‘위력’이란 피해자의 자유의사를 제압하기에 충분한 힘을 말하고, 유형적이든 무형적이든 묻지 않고 폭행·협박뿐만 아니라 사회적·경제적·정치적인 지위나 권세를 이용하는 것도 가능하며, 현실적으로 피해자의 자유의사가 제압될 필요는 없다. 위력으로써 추행하였는지는 행사한 유형력의 내용과 정도, 행위자의 지위나 권세의 종류, 피해자의 연령, 행위자와 피해자의 관계, 그 행위에 이르게 된 경위, 구체적인 행위 모습, 범행 당시의 정황 등 여러 사정을 종합적으로 고려하여 판단하여야 한다. [2] 편의점 업주인 피고인이 아르바이트 구인 광고를 보고 연락한 갑을 채용을 빌미로 불러내 면접을 한 후 자신의 집으로 유인하여 갑의 성기를 만지고 갑에게 피고인의 성기를 만지게 하였다고 하여 성폭력범죄의 처벌 등에 관한 특례법 위반(업무상위력등에의한추행)으로 기소된 사안에서, 피고인이 채용 권한을 가지고 있는 지위를 이용하여 갑의 자유의사를 제압하여 갑을 추행하였다고 본 원심판단이 정당하다고 한 사례.
Order
상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed.
Provisions referred to
[1] 성폭력범죄의 처벌 등에 관한 특례법 제10조 제1항 [2] 성폭력범죄의 처벌 등에 관한 특례법 제10조 제1항
Read 2026-10-25 · Cross-read 2026-10-25. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger