A South Korean court fined a 40-year-old woman 6 million won (S$5,700) for stalking actor Hwang Jung-min, calling her persistent messages and social media posts sufficient to cause anxiety and fear. The case, which drew public attention after the woman claimed a romantic relationship with Hwang, centered on whether her actions constituted stalking under South Korean law. The court rejected her defense that the contact was mutual, citing excessive one-way communication and threatening messages targeting Hwang and his family.
The Goyang Branch of the Uijeongbu District Court convicted the defendant, referred to as “A,” of violating the Act on Punishment of Stalking Crimes. The court ordered a fine of 6 million won (S$5,700) and 40 hours of stalking prevention education. Prosecutors had sought a higher penalty of 10 million won, arguing that the defendant’s actions spanned two years and involved excessive one-way contacts. Key evidence included the defendant’s repeated messages, which the court deemed sufficient to cause the victim anxiety and fear. The prosecution highlighted that Hwang had explicitly requested no further contact, a claim the defendant’s lawyer contested.
Woman convicted of stalking K-actor Hwang Jung-min fined $5,700
The duration of the crime is long, and the number of one-way contacts attempted by the defendant is excessively high, prosecutors stated in court filings. The defendant, who appeared in court wearing a dark gray hat and suit along with a white mask, revealing only long hair beneath the hat while concealing most of her face, argued that the relationship was not one-sided. Her legal team claimed Hwang initiated 62 of 77 calls between May 2024 and May 2025, suggesting mutual communication. However, a report by South Korean media outlet Dispatch noted that Hwang’s calls were primarily to ask the defendant to stop contacting him.
In her closing statement, the defendant acknowledged some fault but rejected the unilateral stalker label. What I fear most is having this defined as something one person did unilaterally to another, when we had no relationship at all,
she said during the trial. The court, however, emphasized that the defendant appeared to have known that the victim did not want further contact. The court rejected the woman’s claim that she and Hwang were in a mutual relationship, finding her guilty of stalking. The number and frequency of messages were sufficient to cause the victim anxiety and fear,
the court said. The defendant appeared to have known that the victim did not want further contact.
Hwang’s agency, SEM Company, praised the court’s decision, stating that the ruling confirms that stalking, which threatens the lives of others, cannot be justified for any reason. The agency also announced plans to pursue legal action against the defendant for the continued spreading of false information and the release or distribution of maliciously edited recordings that occurred during the trial in a statement. The case sparked public debate over the legal definition of stalking and the challenges of proving “unilateral” behavior. Some observers pointed to the defendant’s claims of a romantic relationship as a tactic to deflect from her actions. The number and frequency of messages were sufficient to cause the victim anxiety and fear, the court ruled in its decision.
Hwang Jung Min's Agency Announces Result Of First-Instance Trial
The defendant has not yet announced whether she will appeal the ruling. Meanwhile, A has filed a lawsuit seeking approximately 200 million won in damages from Hwang Jung-min, claiming they were offered a soju business venture by Hwang and subsequently worked on design proposals and scriptwriting but did not receive fair compensation for their efforts. The case highlights the complexities of digital-age stalking, where messages, recordings, and social media posts can blur the lines between harassment and miscommunication. Legal analysts note that the ruling sets a precedent for how courts evaluate “one-way” communication in stalking cases.
The court’s ruling followed a complaint filed by Hwang’s side in August after the defendant uploaded personal recordings of their phone calls and screenshots of their KakaoTalk messages on social media. She claimed that she had been having an affair with Hwang since 2024 and that she had been emotionally and sexually exploited. In February, the court issued a summary order imposing a three million won fine on the woman, but she objected and requested a formal trial. The prosecution sought 10 million won, while the defendant’s lawyer entered a plea of not guilty, arguing that Hwang’s refusal to be contacted was not fully established.
Hwang Jung-min accuser to face sentencing today (8th) after
The number of phone calls between Hwang and the woman emerged as a key issue. Her defense said the two had 77 phone calls between May 2024 and May 2025, 62 of which were initiated by Hwang, arguing that the relationship involved mutual communication. However, the court found that even if there was a legitimate reason for the defendant to contact the victim, the content and frequency of the messages exceeded justification. During the sentencing hearing held by Judge Kim Young-ah of Criminal Division 4 at the Goyang Branch of the Uijeongbu District Court on September 8, prosecutors requested a fine of 10 million won, citing the prolonged duration of the crime and the excessive number of one-way contacts.
The defendant’s legal team emphasized that communication between the two parties was not one-sided and pleaded not guilty to the stalking charges. In their final statement, the defendant acknowledged some fault in their actions but argued, Being labeled as a stalker who chased one person unilaterally for two years is entirely different.
She added, Please look at the records as they are.
The prosecution, however, emphasized that the defendant had posted threatening messages targeting the victim and his family on social media during the trial, and that the victim had requested severe punishment. The court’s decision underscores the legal challenges of distinguishing between persistent communication and harassment in cases involving digital interactions.
Hwang’s agency, SEM Company, released an official statement following the first-instance trial, stating, Through this ruling, the court clarified that the defendant’s past actions constituted a clear crime of stalking, as they ‘seriously infringed upon the daily life of the actor.’
The agency also indicated it would continue to hold the defendant legally accountable for any additional actions without leniency. The case has drawn attention to the broader issue of online harassment and the legal mechanisms available to victims. With the defendant’s potential appeal and the separate civil lawsuit, the matter remains unresolved, highlighting the ongoing struggle to address stalking in the digital age.
