“I was drunk” will no longer get you a reduced sentence in rape cases:

The Supreme Court yesterday confirmed the original verdict at an appeals hearing for a 42-year-old sex offender surnamed Gwak, sentencing him to seven years in prison and that he be listed on the online sex offender registry for five years following his release from prison for rape.
[...]
Gwak appealed to the Supreme Court, saying that the previous trials were unfair because they excluded his drinking excuse when deciding the sentence.

Gwak also said it is unfair that the courts deprived him of a chance to reach an out-of-court settlement with the victim.

In another case, a court in Gwangju actually increased the sentence of another cretin who cited his drunkenness in his appeal.

This seems to be a cause to celebrate. Still, the news ain’t all good. A Seoul Court recently fined a man who was charged with beating and knocking out a noraebang girl after she refused to stay in a hotel with him. He put the unconscious girl in his car and drove around the Seoul/Gyeonggi-do area for several hours before dropping her off at the hospital. In sentencing him to a fine rather than prison, the judge said it was the assailant’s first crime, he did what he did because he was momentarily upset, and that he confined the woman in order to deal with the situation, not commit another crime. The judge also said the man had lost his job over the incident, and if he were sentenced to a suspended prison sentence, he would face serious disadvantages in getting a job.

As I Tweeted at the time, this is why judges get shot with arrows.