A resident walking home late at night passes through an alley and stops at the sight behind a glass window. A man living on the ground floor of a building is naked and committing a lewd act. It was not the first time. This is the story of a residential neighborhood in Gwangjin-gu, Seoul, reported by JTBC's "Incident Desk" on the 28th.
According to the report, the man lived on the ground floor of a four-story church building in the alley as the building's caretaker. Residents witnessed the same scene many times over more than a year, starting last autumn. Early this year, police were dispatched and warned him to put film over the glass, but he reportedly put up film covering only up to chest height and then continued the same behavior, even opening the glass door slightly and looking at passersby. One resident filmed a video and went to the police station, but was told that a statement was needed to formally open a case, and gave up for fear of retaliation. In the end, this resident decided to move out of a home with about ten months left on the lease. The police explained that although there had been several reports, no case had been opened because the residents did not give statements, and said they plan to investigate after a legal review.
Can conduct inside one's own home be a crime? And what can the residents who suffered do? Let us go through these questions in turn.
1. Conduct Inside the Home Can Also Be Punished
A. Elements of the crime of public indecency
Article 245 of the Criminal Act punishes a person who publicly commits an indecent act by imprisonment for not more than one year, a fine not exceeding 5 million won, misdemeanor imprisonment, or a minor fine. There are two elements. The act must be "indecent," and it must be done "publicly," that is, in a state where many people can see it.
B. What matters more than the place is whether it can be seen
Public indecency is not a crime that occurs only on streets or in parks. What the law asks is less where the act took place than whether unspecified people could see it. If, as in this case, the act took place behind a glass window directly facing the alley, with the lights on so that it was fully visible from outside, it is difficult to deny publicness merely because it happened inside a home. If he continued the same behavior toward passersby with the door open even after being warned by the police, the explanation that "I did not know it could be seen from outside" is also unlikely to hold. The detail that he immediately closed the door when a passerby turned around or a patrol car passed is, if anything, read as circumstantial evidence that he knew he could be seen by others.
2. Simple Exposure or an Indecent Act?
A. The line with "excessive exposure" under the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act
Not every act of exposing the body constitutes public indecency. Article 3(1)33 of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act punishes a person who openly exposes a major part of the body, such as the genitals or buttocks, in a public place and causes others to feel embarrassment or displeasure, by a fine not exceeding 100,000 won, misdemeanor imprisonment, or a minor fine. Even for the same exposure, the weight of punishment differs greatly depending on which provision applies.
B. The court's standard
The Supreme Court drew the line between the two provisions as follows.
Supreme Court Decision 2019Do14056, January 16, 2020If an act of exposing a major part of the body merely causes embarrassment or displeasure, it is only a violation of the Punishment of Minor Offenses Act; but if it stimulates the sexual desire of an ordinary person, arouses sexual excitement, and harms a normal sense of sexual shame, it constitutes an indecent act under the Criminal Act.
This judgment called for examining the date, time, and place, the parts of the body exposed, the method and degree of exposure, and the motive and circumstances. It added that indecency must be judged objectively from the viewpoint of the average member of society, not according to the actor's inner intentions. An earlier judgment was to the same effect.
Supreme Court Decision 2005Do1264, January 13, 2006An indecent act means an act that harms the sense of sexual shame and is contrary to the concept of sexual morality, and it does not necessarily require depicting sexual intercourse or expressing a sexual intention.
What was reported in this case is not merely that he was undressed, but that he committed lewd acts while naked. If the facts are confirmed as reported, the case is likely to be handled not as a minor offense but as public indecency under the Criminal Act.
3. What It Means When Police Say They "Cannot Investigate Without a Statement"
A. It is a crime that can be investigated without a complaint
Public indecency is not a crime that can be punished only upon the victim's complaint. Article 234(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that anyone who believes a crime has been committed may file an accusation. Investigative agencies may also open an investigation on their own once they learn of a suspected crime. So the guidance that "it only becomes a case if you file a complaint" is not an accurate explanation. In practice, however, a witness's statement is needed to specify when, where, and what was seen, and video alone is sometimes insufficient to prove the identity of the actor and the date and time. That is presumably why the police asked for a statement.
B. The identity of the person who reports is protected
The biggest reason the residents hesitated to give statements was fear of retaliation. Public indecency falls within "sexual violence crimes" as defined in Article 2(1)1 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes. Article 24 of the same Act prohibits public officials involved in investigations and trials from disclosing or leaking information that could reveal the victim's identity, such as address, name, age, occupation, or appearance, and prohibits anyone from publishing such information in the press or on the internet without the victim's consent. This means that giving a statement does not mean your name and home address will be passed on to the other party as they are.
4. What Can Be Done Now
A. If you are a resident who witnessed it
First, keep records. Film in a way that shows the date, time, and location, and jot down, however briefly, when and what you saw. Records spanning several days, rather than a single sighting, show repetition and intent. Second, do not step forward alone. If several neighbors saw the same scene, giving statements together reduces the burden and increases probative value. Third, request protection of your identity when giving a statement. It is good to ask how your personal information will be handled during the investigation and to state your concerns clearly. Even if you filmed a video, you should avoid posting it online. Even if the purpose was in the public interest, it could escalate into a separate dispute over disclosing the other person's likeness and conduct.
B. If the police put off opening a case
Even if you were told "too much time has passed," there is no need to give up. Because the maximum statutory penalty for public indecency is one year of imprisonment, the statute of limitations for prosecution is five years under Article 249(1)5 of the Criminal Procedure Act. Even for something that happened a year ago, there is ample time left to punish it. If the conduct is continuing, you can simply report again, starting with the most recent sighting. If an oral report is not accepted, another option is to organize the dates, times, places, and video materials of the sightings and submit a written accusation. That leaves a documented record of what you reported and when.
C. If you are the building owner or the person responsible for management
In this case, the building owner's side reportedly apologized to the neighbors and promised that the man would move out and that blocking measures would be taken. A person who manages a building should take practical measures to prevent recurrence, such as changing the structure of the entrance and windows and resolving the residential arrangement with the person at issue. If the neighbors' anxiety continues, it could also lead to a civil dispute.
5. Closing Thoughts
Public indecency is often regarded as a "minor crime," but for residents who must pass through that alley every day, it is something that tears apart their daily lives. In this case, one resident ultimately decided to leave home. An outcome in which the victim moves away and the actor stays put is not fair. Where reports are repeated, investigative agencies should first explain the identity protection procedures and actively verify the facts rather than waiting for statements. Residents, too, need to know that the law has mechanisms to protect those who report, and to raise their voices together rather than enduring it alone.
(Shin Dong-woo, Managing Partner, DAEON Law Firm)
This column provides general legal information based on Korean statutes and court decisions as of 2026. 10. 30.. It is not legal advice on any individual case.
2026. 10. 30. · By Attorney Dongwoo Shin
Call
KakaoTalk
E-mail