A taxi driver is crying foul after an American English teacher charged with assaulting him fled the country, reports Yonhap.
According to Gwangju’s Bukbu Police Station and Chonnam National University, the 39-year-old American, identified as M, left for Migukistan last month while he was being investigated for assault.
He is accused of beating a 52-year-old taxi driver, a Mr. Kim, near the dormitory of Chonnam National University at around 1:30am on Feb 20.
M reportedly told police that he tried to restrain Mr. Kim after he saw him squabble with a female American coworker over taxi fare and misunderstood the situation.
On March 9, police applied for a detention warrant against M as Kim was seriously injured. In accordance with instructions from prosecutors, they carried out a corroborative investigation, but M fled the country in the meantime.
On April 2, police belatedly applied for an arrest warrant for M and put him on the wanted list.
According to Yonhap, M told acquaintances he was going to put together funds to deal with the case and left for the United States. A few days later, he send an email to Chonnam National University and others saying he would not return to Korea.
The victim, Kim, is protesting that due to the poor response by prosecutors and police, he would not get a trial or restitution.
An official from Kim’s side said he suffered injuries that took eight weeks to heal and filed petitions and statements three times, but police and prosecutors did not accept Kim’s demand for a travel ban or that M be detained while under investigation. The official asked if a criminal, having been left alone to flee, would buy a plane ticket to return to Korea after an arrest warrant has been issued for him.
Kim plans to conduct to conduct a letter signing campaign calling for measures to be taken against foreign criminals and send appeals to local governments. Or as his side told the Chosun Ilbo (or Yonhap via the Chosun Ilbo), “We need to create a system to protect citizens from foreign criminals… I will inform the National Human Rights Commission about this incident, and plan to conduct a signature campaign.”
According to the Chosun, police said because M had worked a long time at a national university, had gotten a lawyer and was showing up for questioning, they didn’t believe they needed to apply for a travel ban. Prosecutors say that in the case of major crimes, they can request a criminal be extradicted, but in this case, it would be realistically difficult to investigate prior to the accused returning to Korea on his own to undergo investigation.
{ 52 comments… read them below or add one }
“Migukistan” Oh Robert, you crack me up.
I won’t take his complaints seriously until he holds a candle light vigil outside the Migukistan Embassy.
“…or restitution.”
Yup, he missed the gravy train.
“An official from Kim’s side said he suffered [serious] injuries that took eight weeks to heal…” I wonder why we never hear about the [serious) injury? What “restraint” injury could possibly take 8 weeks to heal and I’d bet those 8 weeks were spent in hospital aye?
Yes, the details of “M’s” “crimes” seem dubious.
Well, seeing as how Nicholas Cage just got charged with domestic assault for (apparently) grabbing and pulling his wife by the arm (leaving no injury), but I regularly see Korean boyfriends repeatedly chasing/pulling/holding down their girlfiends who are attempting to walk off, until the girls basically give up in exhaustion, maybe the prescription here should be for some cross-cultural education on both sides, i.e. on how a man can interact with a woman physically, and how another man can “protect” her. On more than one occasion, I’ve also heard recent arrivals mention how they’d clobber any guy who mistreated a woman. (Eye roll.)
In disclosure, I did an M.A. at Chonnam and surely know many people who know this guy well, although I’m not sure yet whether I’ve met him myself.
“girlfiends”, heh. I had one of those…
What’s eight weeks worth nowadays? That must be 16 million won or more. The guy did a cold economic calculation and decided to absquatulate.
Well, the Chosun has a bit more on it:
Yup, it would take 6 to 8 weeks for a broken kneecap to mend and longer for the tendons and ligaments to be back to normal. Depending on which leg was broken, the taxi driver could have had no choice but to take a break from work.
If Chonnam National University sponsored Mr. M’s E2 (or E1) visa , then shouldn’t they be responsible for his conduct in Korea?
Would not Mr. Kim the taxi driver be able to sue Chonnam National University since Mr M has now fled the country?
With these few facts, it’s easy to understand M’s position. You show up to the police/prosecutors office. Maybe play it straight. But at some point the pot odds don’t look so good and you have to fold’em.
Reminds me of the time a teacher was assaulted by a homeless bum. The crowd and the police immediately blamed the white monkey. Two hours in a cop shop hoping that the truth comes out can be a little rattling. Fortunately for the white monkey, the homeless guy was truly a soju-psycho. When pscho man started freaking out in the cop shop, the local constabulary let whitey go with an apology.
Moral of the story: getting involed, in any way, with the authorities in a criminal (sic restitution) matter is a poker game.
If that were true, then the flip side would be that it would be cool for your place of employment to control what you do during your free time. In fact it would invest them with a legal right to do so and under Korean law people of majority who aren’t incompetent or quasi-incompetent are able to exercise their rights and duties without the consent of an agent by law. But even if that were the case employers were the legal guardians of foreign teachers, the school still would not be responsible in this instance. Parents don’t go to jail when their kids commit crimes.
Wasn’t that the Metropolitician’s story?
If that were true, then the flip side would be that it would be cool for your place of employment to control what you do during your free time. In fact it would invest them with a legal right to do so and under Korean law people of majority who aren’t incompetent or quasi-incompetent are able to exercise their rights and duties without the consent of an agent by law.
- I never knew this included the *right* to assault a taxi driver (if this was the case; however we probably will not know because Mr. M has fled the country)
But even if that were the case employers were the legal guardians of foreign teachers, the school still would not be responsible in this instance.
- I never used the term *guardians* I said sponsor.
Who’s to say he didn’t have the injury beforehand? I guess he’ll have to pay off the doctor which provided him the notice on his own unless he goes after the university.
No, it’s not within the “scope of employment” and, even if it could be so construed, it’s within the “frolic and detour” exception.
Would have been easier and cheaper to have just paid the taxi fare rather than try to impress the American girl and have to flee the country.
If you think I’m implying here that anyone has a right to assault another person for any reason, you’ve misread what I’ve written.
You argue that Chonnam University should be responsible for M’s actions. If an employer is responsible (i.e. can be prosecuted/sued) for the non-work related actions of its employee, you imply that the employer has a legal duty to prevent the employee from taking such actions. Since every duty gives rise to a right (and vice versa) then it follows thatthe employer has a right to regulate the non-work related actions of its employee. You’ve given the employer the right to make decisions (beyond the terms of the employment agreement between employer and employee) on behalf of the employee. That’s voluntary legal guardianship.
The only people who spend 8 consecutive weeks in hospital are those in comas. And fully conscious Koreans who have been injured by others.
Korean law requires a certain number of days of hospitalisation for the full brunt of the law to slammed down upon the attacker. You’ll notice that every news story reports the victim of assault requires long periods of treatment – months in fact. Ever notice the abundance of mini (3-4 storey) hospitals in Korea? Patients live there. Playing cards. Watching TV. Drinking soju. Arguing. And arranging nighttime visits by coffee delivery women. You ought to see many now. Much like the cherry blossoms of April they bloom from their hospital beds and wheel themselves and their IVs to convenience stores to drink even more. It’s the greatest vacation. Ever.
Frankly, “M” should deal with the consequences of his actions, apologize for a situation he added to, due to his misunderstanding, pay off the driver, get the driver to drop charges, etc. but, by leaving, I can’t help but think that the rest of us will have to foot the bill, in one way or another, for this negative PR.
Maybe this explains why the fellow I know, with the F1 visa, is having to get an FBI check done for his university now, even though immigration does not ask for such.
It is never wise to get into fisticuffs. I can understand why it happens with some taxi drivers though. Most of them are great guys, but there are quite a few utter arseholes driving taxis, I’ve had to restrain my temper a few times with some of them.
According to my wife one of the few jobs an ex con can get is driving a taxi ,so a disproportionate number of them are rather dodgy characters in comparison to folks in other jobs. Personally I think taxi drivers should have to have criminal background checks, if you think about it it’s far more important for taxi drivers to have clean records than E2 holders. Taxi drivers often have women or vulnerable drunk people in their cars and often late at night. I’ve even been driven on a couple of occasions by taxi drivers with serious soju breath.
I’ve had a few arguments with taxi drivers myself over fares when they have decides to go the ‘scenic route’ rather than take me to where I actually wanted to go. It hasn’t happened many times, but it has happened too many times.
In no way am I condoning the actions of the American, but Mr. Kim may have got very violent indeed to sustain a broken knee. I’ve seen taxi drivers start fights with people (usually a fellow taxi driver) before. All the best taxi drivers I’ve had have been female, usually far better drivers and I’ve never ever had a problem with one. It’s a shame they’re so rare.
A broken knee takes at least 2 months to get better, plus more time for physio. Broken knees are very nasty indeed. I think the details are too patchy to really condemn the American or the Korean. It could well have been a case of 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.
You argue that Chonnam University should be responsible for M’s actions. If an employer is responsible (i.e. can be prosecuted/sued) for the non-work related actions of its employee, you imply that the employer has a legal duty to prevent the employee from taking such actions.”
Where did he argue that. He referred to a sponsors responsibilty, not a legal duty of care.
I don’t know the current sponsorship requirements but I seem to recall that the sponsor used to have to indemnify the debts and actions of a sponsee to some degree.
If this is the were the case then it might be possible to sue the sponsor for restitution. Under an indemnity.
Does anyone recall the contents of the sponsorship form?
MBC has a report showing the driver’s injuries and a re-enactment:
http://imnews.imbc.com/replay/nwtoday/article/2831506_5782.html
“전치 8주” does not mean “spending 8 consecutive weeks in hospital.” But I’m sure that doesn’t really matter to you. As long as you get your Korea-bashing fix in, who cares about those pesky things like “definitions,” right?
Watched the video with the sketches of the reenactment. It happened right in front of the elevator, which makes me suspect that their should be CCTV footage. (Don’t all apartments have CCTV cams watching the elevators?) Any mention of this in the article?
@24
Under the Immigration Control Act (출입국관리법률), the “fidelity guarantor”(신원보증인) of a foreigner (피신원보증인) is responsible for, or must vouch that the foreigner is able to pay for all expenses related to sojourn (체류), internment (보호, i.e. the arrest without trial for violating immigration laws), and deportation (출국) while in Korea, and if the foreigner is unable to pay for these expenses, the guarantor is obligated to pay on his/her behalf. A fidelity bond (신원보증) is required for all foreign sojourners possessing certain visa types (E1, E2, E7, etc.). The fidelity guarantor would the obligor, while the obligee in this case appears to be KIS.
I can’t find anything that says that an employer is responsible for paying indemnity for a foreign employee charged with a non-immigration, non-work related crime.
i don’t understand. was it “near the dormitory” or was it in the lobby of the dormitory, as in the reinactment?
Interesting stuff, thanks Milton.
@TommyK #29:
The article uses 인근 (전남대 기숙사 인근에서), which is a formal word like English vicinity. IANAL, but I don’t think English “vicinity” in such a report would be taken to exclude the lobby of a building, either. Probably a better translation.
i would get the hell out of dodge too. it’s not worth it. sucks for the dude but it’s not like he got paralyzed or something.
The dude was 39 years old? Well it’s about time he stops teaching English and goes home to get on with his life.
If he were in a country that had a justice system where one wasn’t responsible for damages that occured defending oneself or others, and where one was innocent until proven guilty, I’d say he was a coward for running. As it is, I can’t blame him.
“Time to get out of Dodge cuase this aint Kansas.”
Hmm.. Sounds like a Country and Western song.
Anyways
Milton – very inforamtive post.
You mean I’ve wasted the last 20 years of my life? Shit, I’d better go home and get on with my life.
Darth, I was being an obtuse ass intentionally. Don’t take that too seriously–you’re alright in my book.
JG29A #6
“In disclosure, I did an M.A. at Chonnam and surely know many people who know this guy well, although I’m not sure yet whether I’ve met him myself.”
Why don’t you get with the many people you know who know this guy well and have them tell the guy to post his side of the story?
I’m pretty sure that “eight weeks” refers to the putative recovery time, not all of which would be in the hospital. Break your arm, it takes 6-8 weeks to recover — but usually all but a day or two is spent out and about in the cast.
do we need any more proof that your average english teacher is just a scumbag who thinks he’s there to save korean women even though ain’t no korean woman asked him to save her?
Yes.
The woman in question wasn’t a Korean, douchebag.
@40
So if a guy is man-handling a woman and she doesn’t ask for help, everyone else should just mind their own business? Sounds just like something a woman-beater would say. What a scumbag.
Arghaeri and iwshim—thanks!
Just to shed a little more light on the subject:
Whether or not the school would be responsible for the damages, I think, depends on the meaning of “the guaranteed foreigner’s expenses related to sojourn” (피보증외국인의 체류…드는 비용) in the Immigration Control Act. Interpret it in the most conservative manner possible and you could make a case that it strictly applies to those expenses necessary to one’s stay (food, shelter, utilities, communication, a way to get home, etc). You could interpret it more broadly to include any or all debts incurred during the period of sojourn. But as I said before, during the course of my very superficial and brief research into the matter, I am unable to find any cases in which an employer was ordered to pay compensation stemming from a criminal act committed by a foreigner (there could be, though). Article 2 of the Fidelity Guarantee Act [신원보증법, 제2조 (정의)] specifically states that a fidelity guarantee contract protects employers from negligence committed by an employee during the course of performing his or her their duties (…피용자가 업무를 수행하는 과정에서…). Clearly M was not “performing his duties [to the employer]” on that fateful night—unless we as temporary sojourners are always “performing our duty.”
But a fidelity guarantee on a foreigner (외국인보증) is somewhat different than the fidelity guarantee on a salaryman. Typically an employer concludes a fidelity guarantee contract with a third party (usually an insurance company). The employer is the obligee who will be compensated and the third party is the obligor. In this case of a fidelity guarantee on a foreigner, the employer acts as the obligor and Korea Immigration Service (and/or perhaps the Ministry of Justice—I’m not really sure, but KIS comes under the fold of the MoJ) acts as the obligee. This specific type of fidelity guarantee contract is not designed to protect employers from damage, but rather KIS from damages incurred by foreign sojourners.
But assume for a moment that a judge did rule that M (in absentia) had to pay compensation to the taxi driver, and the employer was responsible for paying compensation. Would they have to pay the full amount? Perhaps not.
The third clause of article 6 of the Fidelity Guarantee Act [신원보증법, 제6조 제3항] reads as follows:
Likely, if it could be demonstrated that the university was negligent in their hiring practices (say, if they overlooked a pattern of aggressive, violent behavior, or if they ignored a serious drinking problem or bad prior references) they would have to pay more (and note that article 3 of the act allows the guarantor to terminate the agreement if the guarantor—or the guarantee—becomes aware of negligent acts committed by the principal that have not resulted in damages). But if M were a church-going saint who read to orphans on the weekend and crapped puppy dogs and butterflies—but just happened to have been having a bad day—then the matter becomes less clear.
“According to my wife one of the few jobs an ex con can get is driving a taxi ,so a disproportionate number of them are rather dodgy characters in comparison to folks in other jobs. ”
One guy cut me off and parked his car in the middle of the intersection, waiting for the arrow to turn left. When I honked at him and swerved around him, he followed me to the next light and jumped out of his car. Had it been back home, I would have stepped out, picked him up by the seat of his pants and thrown him back in his taxi, but it wasn’t worth 2 million won to me. So, I went with the cheapest option: I took a picture of the license plate with my car. The guy panicked and jumped right back in his taxi and waved at me to go on. When I went to the police station to file a complaint, their reaction upon running the license plate was, “Oh, that guy.” You’re wife is right. Some of these guys are definitely known by the cops.
I took a picture with by cell phone, no my car…
I live in Gwangju and know all the parties involved with the exception of the taxi driver. I would like to clarify a few things here.
Does it not seem strange that Mr.M would suddenly attack an innocent taxi driver and beat him around for no reason? The “squabble” referred to in the article was indeed assault. After extremely overcharging the “female” they had a verbal argument. She paid the fare and left. But not to lose the argument, Kim followed her into the dorm (breaking the door in the process) and began to manhandle her. M saw this and jumped in to protect his friend and co-worker.
I’m not saying he did the right thing but honestly consider if you would just stand around while your friend was getting assaulted.
M was more than willing to pay the blood money and even met with a lawyer and Kim. However, Kim refused to accept anything less than 60 million won for his exaggerated injuries. He was not actually hurt as bad as he claimed and actually started driving again during the days while staying at the hospital. Can you say insurance fraud? The reporter who covered this story clearly talked with Kim and just reported his story. If there had been any kind of fact checking done you would see that Kim’s knee was not broken. But yes, his tooth was.
Unwilling to pay 60 million won to Kim, the only other option for M was court, a large fine and jail time, after which he would be deported because of his criminal status while on an E2 visa.
Again, what would you do? Jail, compensation, and deportation or just cut and run?
“Female” was also told that she would not be allowed to file a lawsuit because poor Kim had been beat up already. Kim was not charged with anything nor was he forced to compensate for the broken dormitory door.
If you read this whole post, I applaud your endurance. I didn’t want to write a book, just clarify a few points.
Happy to read albinokimchi’s statement, and as another who is familiar with the case can fully endorse the version of events outlined above.
TommyK – to make this extra clear, the taxi driver followed the woman into the dormitory building & elevator, forcing his way through a security door that generally requires a fingerprint to gain entry. One would think that this point alone would place the taxi driver in a negative light – it seems to be being overlooked in the poor quality and superficial reporting on this issue, however, and was certainly pointedly ignored in the police investigation.
milton – There is no alcoholism, poor behavior, record of indiscretions, bad references or otherwise associated with the American man. Actually, he’s a very decent guy with a reputation and references to match, and there are many foreign and Korean members of the local community who would second me on this.
cmm – the CCTC was disabled, presumably by the university or their subsidiary (for unknown reasons), prior to evening the woman was followed and attacked, and I am told continues to be disabled, also for unknown reasons.
In response to the random suggestions that this was a case of a man attempting to impress a woman: The American man was not keeping company with the woman, but was in the immediate vicinity of the building (taking a friend’s dog out for a walk actually – as mentioned, he happens to be a very sweet and decent guy) and was alerted by the sounds of scuffling and a woman screaming, at which he reacted, as any decent person hopefully would, by attempting to help.
Further, for those watching the re-enactment on MBC – I definitely dispute the portrayal of physical events. It appears to have overlooked the taxi driver’s violent behavior and grossly exaggerated the physical intervention of the American, which was intended to restrain, not attack the driver.
I’d like to point out that I’m not adding to albinokimchi’s post to support any of the Korea bashing contained in earlier posts by others, and don’t appreciate the mindless comments they contain. However, having had a prime seat to witness a very decent guy’s life, bank account, future plans, relationship, friendships and future employment options being ripped apart over the last couple of months has been deeply disturbing. Perhaps his reputation (in ‘anonymity’ or otherwise) among the English speaking community here (and I most emphatically include Korean speakers of English in that category) doesn’t need to be trashed as well.
Wow. Not really surprised at all – have been warned about how physical conflicts here often result in the employment of crooked doctors’ reports to exaggerate injuries. Thanks to albino & havetosay for the insights into who the real scumbags are.
Wow. Not really surprised at all – have been warned about how physical conflicts here often result in the employment of crooked doctors’ reports to exaggerate injuries. Of course, no one would be surprised about the quality Of the local media’s reporting on the case. Thanks to albino & havetosay for the insights into who the real scumbags are in this case.
#48 havetosaysomething,
“I’d like to point out that I’m not adding to albinokimchi’s post to support any of the Korea bashing contained in earlier posts by others, and don’t appreciate the mindless comments they contain.”
Where is the “Korea bashing?” Shall we just ignore post #40, or that Taxi drivers don’t need criminal record checks to work?
#47 shows the clear difference between South Korea and the USA.
In most of the USA, the taxi driver would have been arrested. He would have been tasered if he resisted. He might well have been “shot while trying to escape”. And he would have been fortunate to have only a chipped tooth.
In South Korea, the law requires you to meekly accept being assaulted. In America, you can use “appropriate” force to defend yourself. In Texas, as well as many other States, one may use deadly force if one is in fear of one’s life.
You must log in to post a comment.
{ 2 trackbacks }