A fried chicken restaurant owner who threw a hammer at an employee has received a suspended prison sentence in a first-instance ruling.
According to JTBC's "Sageon Banjang," a TV crime news program, the Gwangju District Court recently sentenced a man identified only as A to one year in prison, suspended for two years, on charges of aggravated assault.
A is accused of assaulting a worker in his 50s with a hammer at his fried chicken restaurant on a January afternoon.
The conflict reportedly began when A repeatedly served employees leftover food, which the victim objected to.
On the day of the incident, A had set out cabbage, leafy vegetables and soy sauce left over from two days earlier as the staff's dinner. When the victim complained, the two got into an argument.
A then called the victim aside, led him to the basement and threatened to kill him before hurling a 43-centimeter hammer at him.
The hammer struck a pillar before hitting the victim on the head. The victim collapsed and bled, but A left the basement without rendering any assistance.
The victim made his way outside on his own and was taken to a hospital with the help of another employee. He escaped life-threatening injury.
After the incident, A's wife sent the victim a letter urging him to settle, saying her husband had anger management issues stemming from a cancer diagnosis. She also reportedly asked whether he would be willing to continue helping at the restaurant.
During the trial, it also emerged that A had previously been fined for a similar offense.
The court said it took into account that the prior conviction was "a punishment from about 28 years ago" and that A had acknowledged wrongdoing and made a criminal deposit of 10 million won ($7,070) for the victim, before handing down the suspended sentence. Prosecutors have appealed the ruling.
A is still operating the restaurant. He told the program that he had not thrown the hammer intending to strike the victim, but acknowledged that acting on impulse had been wrong and that he would accept any legal consequences.
On the matter of serving employees reused food, however, A said he had spoken individually with all the staff and that none had raised complaints. "The employees said it was edible and good enough," he said. "Only the victim took issue with it."
choigo@heraldcorp.com