The price of mistakenly stealing garbage bags

In frontline police stations, there is the Minor Offense Screening Committee. In its operating rules, the first article, establishment purpose, sets out the direction of the committee: “To prevent producing criminal records of a suspect who committed a minor offense.” The purpose is to demonstrate tolerance in our society, starting with the police, which represents the first step in the Korean criminal justice system.

Since its inception in 2015, the Minor Offense Screening Committee has largely achieved its objectives. In 2020, in Daejeon, and last year, in North Chungcheong Province, two elderly individuals in their 80s who had stolen thousands of won worth of goods were released with a warning. Perhaps they and their acquaintances have learned that the police do not exist solely to punish.

However, this tolerance did not apply to Mr. Lee Moo-jae (84). Mr. Lee made his living by collecting waste paper. In April of last year, he was accused of theft for taking 10 standard garbage bags, totaling 15,000 won, from a paper box in front of a restaurant. Unlike those released with a warning earlier, Lee's case was not brought to the committee's attention. “The case was not referred because neither Mr. Lee nor the victim actively pursued a settlement,” said an official from the police station in charge. “Settlement is an important criterion for referral to the committee.”

Seven months later, the court fined Lee 300,000 won and sentenced him to one year of probation. “Lee concluded the standard garbage bags were discarded in boxes while collecting them placed in front of the restaurant,” the court said. However, the court took into consideration that Lee was a first-time offender and elderly, so he was sentenced to probation. The judgment became final. Lee will not have to pay a fine unless he commits another offense, so it could be claimed that Korean society has shown tolerance.

After months of going through the criminal justice system, Lee's life was shattered. His spinal stenosis has recently worsened, confining him to bed for most of his days. Consequently, he can no longer continue to collect waste paper. His income is now limited to a few hundred thousand won from the government.

He still wonders if it was really necessary to be judged by the police, prosecutors, and courts for taking the 15,000 won worth of goods left outside the store's door. His doubts have intensified with each step of the process, fueling his growing anger toward society.

I wonder if tolerance would have arrived more quickly for an 80-year-old man who, while impoverished, collected waste paper to maintain independence. Unfortunately, Lee’s case couldn't be referred to the committee. Of course, the police's explanation that they were unable to include Mr. Lee's case on the agenda due to the lack of settlement is understandable as it could have exposed the police to criticism for “arbitrary law enforcement” from the victim.

However, it is notable that the committee's rules do not specify that a settlement between the parties is a prerequisite for proposing an item on the agenda and that a majority vote is required after the proposal. The committee does not necessarily issue disciplinary actions; instead, a vote of up to seven members is conducted. At least half of the members must be non-police officers. The system is designed to avoid criticism that the police would have been concerned about.

Now, it would be difficult to ease Mr. Lee's anger with the law. But I hope that the police will hear his lament, wishing that there will be no more people like me in the future.