Teen Alleging Sexual Assault Dies After Police Decision Not to Refer Case

A teenage girl in Ansan, Gyeonggi Province, who claimed she was sexually assaulted by her bar employer, was found dead after protesting the police's decision not to forward the case. This incident raises significant questions about the adequacy of police investigation processes and judicial procedures for sexual assault victims.

A, a 19-year-old part-time employee, filed a complaint with the police on December 28 last year against B, the 40-something male owner of the bar where she worked, accusing him of quasi-rape. During her police interview on the same day she filed the complaint, A stated that she lost her memory after drinking and woke up to find B engaging in sexual activity, compiling a statement of over ten pages. At the time, A's blood alcohol content was 0.085%, exceeding the 0.08% level considered grounds for license revocation.

Police investigated based on CCTV footage from the bar and testimonies from two other individuals present. B and his employees had been drinking until morning after closing the establishment. Police determined that sexual intercourse occurred in a blind spot of the CCTV after the group had largely dispersed. CCTV footage captured the two smiling and conversing, and B seeing A off when they parted ways. Citing multiple instances of physical contact during the preceding drinking session, police concluded that it was difficult to determine that A was subjected to the act while in a state of incapacitation. B denied the charges, claiming the sexual encounter was consensual, and testimonies from witnesses did not support the criminal charges. Consequently, the police decided not to refer the case.

However, A, who received notification of the non-referral decision on February 18, died by suicide by jumping from a building three days later, on February 21. Prior to her death, A had sent messages to acquaintances stating she had been sexually assaulted and wanted to die. An appeal letter found on A's mobile phone expressed her inability to accept the investigation results, her denial of consent, and the severe psychological trauma she experienced after the incident. Her family protested, alleging an inadequate police investigation.

The police treated A's written statement as a formal appeal and forwarded the case to the prosecutor's office. However, despite requests from prosecutors for supplementary investigation, the police maintained their previous conclusion on July 7, stating that B's charges could not be substantiated, and informed the prosecution. A police official explained that victim interviews for sexual assault cases are minimized to one session to prevent secondary victimization and that necessary explanations regarding the investigation and appeal procedures were provided to the victim. The police also stated that the non-referral decision was unavoidable due to the abundance of evidence, including CCTV footage, and the lack of additional evidence submitted by the victim.