A CEO of an agency, referred to as “A,” was been found guilty of sexually assaulting a trainee and was been sentenced to prison in October 2016.

On January 31, the Criminal Division of the Uijeongbu District Court revealed that “A” is in court custody, and has also been ordered to 40 hours of sexual violence treatment courses in addition to his prison sentence.

“A” was originally indicted in 2016 for what occurred back in March 2014. “A” first tried to force himself on “B,” who was a trainee at the time, after they wrapped up filming for a music video and had a few drinks. They were in his car’s backseat while a designated driver drove them, when he first forcibly assaulted her, and he indecently touched her once more after they got out of the car later, saying, “I want to check whether you have had plastic surgery on your chest.”

According to the prosecution, “A” sexually assaulted “B” again in a karaoke room later the same year, in August 2014.

During the first trial which took place in October 2016, the court originally found that the trainee’s testimony regarding the sexual assault was not credible enough, stating that “B” continued to perform at various events and signed an exclusive contract with the agency “A” is CEO of in April 2014. Therefore, the court ruled that “A” was innocent of sexually assaulting the trainee, which was appealed immediately.

However, the court presiding over the appeals trial ruled differently.

They called attention to the fact that “B” was older than the typical trainee (32 years of age by Korean reckoning), and that there was a higher risk of scrutiny from younger trainees. They stated that it’s understandable she didn’t speak out right away even after she debuted since it could negatively influence her career.

In addition, during the appeals trial, CEO “A” was inconsistent about who was driving, claiming it was him at first during the first sexual assault incident. He was also found to have reportedly said before the assault, “Trainees and agency CEOs have to sleep with each other.”

The court ultimately judged, “‘A’ used his position as a CEO to persistently exploit an aspiring singer, and showed no signs of remorse [for his actions] by pleading ‘not guilty,’ given the nature of his crime.”

They further explained that they found CEO “A” guilty of sexual assault because they took into consideration that sexual assault cases involving those in the entertainment industry happens often, and there must be a severe consequence for such actions.

Source (1)