Article from MoneyToday:
Light Punishment for Man who Killed Neighbor’s Pet Dog to Eat
Last September, 23-year-old Park Ji-hye, a resident of Cheongsong, North Gyeongsang Province, was shocked to discover her pet dog of eight years, named Gillyongyi, had become someone’s meal.
A 60-year-old man who lived next door killed her pet dog after it briefly left her yard, then ate the dog.
The killing outraged Ms. Park, who had thought of her dog as a younger brother. What has been more infuriating is the light punishment her neighbor received for the slaughter.
The lighter than anticipated punishment came after the police in charge of this case treated it as a case of “damaged property” rather than animal abuse.
The police explained to her that the property damage law can slap a heavier punishment on the offender, but Park vented pent-up anger saying, “Gillyongyi was my family. Is he someone else’s property?”
With the prevalence of nuclear families and rapidly aging demographics, a growing number of people regard pets as life companions, setting the stage for the pet industry to grow exponentially. In a marked contrast to growing acceptance of pet animals, animal protection policy and law is still in its infancy.
Act of Killing a familiy member is equal to property damage act?
There are reported;y many cases where companion pets were slain but it is considered an act of property damage in legal investigations, thus not falling under animal protection act.
In once case from October 2013, a man in his thirties killed a dog named Rusi after her owner, his girlfriend, said she wanted to break up with him. In a fit of anger, the man threw the dog off the 14th floor of an apartment building, then stomped him to death when he was found to be alive on the ground. The dog had been with ex-girlfriend for 14 years. The man was fined ￦3 million on a charge of property damage.
In another case announced on February 11, 2014, a 50-something man faced ￦300,000 in fines after he killed his neighbor’s Rottweiler with an electric saw. He was accused of damaging property.
Why is the killing of a creature regarded as destruction of property?
The Korean Organization for the Protection of Cats (KOPC) said, “(The reason why these cases happen is) the animal protection act specifies outrageously light punishments. The relevant law should be beefed up to harshly punish animal abusers.”
According to present animal protection law, those who mistreat animals can face one year or less in prison or a fine of up to ￦10 million.
This is in contrast to the property damage law, which provides for a prison sentence of three years or less, or up to ￦7 million in fines.
The tougher punishment stipulated in the property damage law explains why the police seek to apply the latter to animal abusers.
The KOPC said, “some advanced nations put animal abusers in prison, showing a stark contrast with South Korea, which imposes fines of ￦200,000-300,000 for animal abuse. Along with stepped up punishment, various programs should be introduced, including community service and education programs.”
In the United States in 2009, a woman who shot a 6-week-old dog to death was sentenced to five years behind bars and a $500 fine.
The same year, a Polish woman also was subject to a two year prison sentence after she was found to have starved a pregnant dog to death.
Animal Abuses Turn into Crimes against Humans?
Experts point out that animal abusers could commit a crime against humans, calling for a tougher animal protection law and changes in social awareness.
KOPC Representative Kim said, “We should consider the killing of a life without a sense of guilt to be alarming. A human being could be the next target of such aggression.”
The U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) said after analyzing 387 serial killers, “Serial killers tend to begin abusing animals to get an understanding about how to abuse creatures, before they do harmful acts against fellow humans.”
Reinforcing the FBI’s findings, Yoo Young-cheol, a notoriously prolific murderer who killed 23 women, including an elderly couple, is said to have killed small animals like rats and cats when he was a child.
Another serial killer, Kang Ho-soon, who murdered eight women in southwestern Gyeonggi Province, is said to have raised dogs and chickens, then slaughtered, hanged or starved them in a brutal manner.
Chief Vet. Lee So-ra of the Veterinary Medical Teaching School, affiliated with Seoul National University, said, “Criminal psychologists consistently said a common trait running through serial killers is the habit of abusing animals at a young age. This means that if animal abusers go unnoticed and unchecked, they can turn into a criminal detrimental to families and social security. We should bear this in mind.”
Comments from Daum:
Is he out of his mind? How could he eat a pet dog? Did he drool whenever he saw the dog?
오자서: [responding to above]
Dogs on the loose should be eaten up. In the eyes of that bitch owner, the dog is a cute pet, but for a parent with a little daughter, that same dog can be a frightening monster. I think it’s good the man ate the dog.
대명용이: [responding to 스폰지]
There are other breeds of dogs for eating. Let’s not bash the eating of dog meat itself.
If I were her, I would want to punch him to death. How could he kill and eat that dog?
What’s the point of this 60-year-old man going on living if all he cares about is increasing his stamina after consuming what was a beloved animal? Even if it helps with his stamina, he will not use the stamina for good. He’s definitely not the kind of man who goes around doing good deeds.
gyudam: [responding to above]
Isn’t it wrong that the owner let a dog that could harm people go free???
There is no way to handle a man like him other than burying him deep into the ground.
Go to a dog meat restaurant. Don’t steal other dogs for eating.
Comments from Naver:
Why does the article bring up Rottweilers? Why doesn’t the article say that some developed nations would charge an owner with attempted murder when a fierce dog is unattended without a lead and a muzzle, like a Rottweiler?
lee7****: [responding to above]
That’s right. A line needs to be drawn between a case where a person is threatened by a fierce dog, and this one.
Did he really eat someone else’s pet dog for stamina? He might as well eat up a baby next door at this rate. What a barbaric act!