Kim was accused of selecting four ice cream bars and one snack at a self-service store in Gyeonggi province around 22h30 on 24/7/2024. However, he only paid for the ice cream, costing 3,000 won, and a 50 won plastic bag at the self-checkout, leaving without paying for the 1,500 won (1 USD) snack.
Additionally, Kim was accused of taking an 800 won ice cream bar from the freezer but not returning it before leaving the store.
The store owner reported the incident to the police, stating that a snack had been stolen and an ice cream bar melted, causing financial loss. Kim paid the owner 100,000 won in compensation, after which the store submitted a written plea for leniency.
Kim told police he had no intention to steal, having simply forgotten to pay while listening to music with headphones.
 |
A convenience store with a self-checkout counter in Seoul. Photo: JoongAng Ilbo |
The Suwon District Prosecutor's Office, which investigated the case, suspended Kim's prosecution in 9/2024. Citing the total value of 2,300 won for the unpaid snack and the melted ice cream bar, they concluded that a crime had occurred but decided not to proceed with a trial.
Kim filed a complaint in 11/2024, arguing that the prosecution's decision to suspend charges, based on an assumption of guilt, violated his constitutional rights to equality and the pursuit of happiness. Kim had no prior criminal record and had never been prosecuted.
On 5/1, the Constitutional Court upheld Kim's argument and overturned the prosecution's decision to suspend charges. In its ruling, the court stated that despite insufficient evidence to definitively conclude Kim intended to steal the ice cream or snack, the prosecution issued its suspension decision under the premise that the theft accusation was valid. The court found this decision contained serious errors in the investigation and evidence assessment, infringing upon Kim's rights to equality and the pursuit of happiness.
The court noted that surveillance camera footage from the store showed Kim leaving the ice cream on top of the freezer without taking it. Therefore, it could not be concluded that Kim intended to steal.
Regarding the alleged snack theft, the court found no compelling evidence to prove Kim's intent to steal, especially as he had paid for all other items.
The prosecution argued that Kim frequently checked his phone throughout the incident, implying he might have verified payment information but deliberately failed to pay for the snack. However, the court rejected this argument, stating that merely using a phone was insufficient to prove intent to steal, as "Kim could simply have been changing songs or using his phone for other purposes."
Tue Anh (according to Chosun, JoongAng Ilbo)
