Man fined for tracking flight attendant via name tag, sending 5 messages over 6 days

A man who tracked down a flight attendant's social media account using her name tag and sent her five messages over six days has been fined 3 million won ($2,210). A court found that his conduct met the legal threshold of persistent and repeated stalking behavior.

Judge Kim Beom-jin of the Seoul Southern District Court's Criminal Division 10 handed down the fine to the defendant, identified only as A, on charges of violating the Act on Punishment of Stalking Crimes, according to legal sources.

In June last year, A approached the victim — a flight attendant — outside a hotel in Gangseo-gu, Seoul, and asked for her contact information. She declined. A then used her name, which he had read off her uniform name tag, to find her social media account. Over the following six days, he sent her five messages, including "Hello," "hello," and "I'd like to talk more."

Investigators referred A to trial on charges of violating the anti-stalking law, which punishes conduct that persistently and repeatedly delivers messages or written communications to a victim against their will and without justifiable reason.

A was initially issued a summary order — a simplified procedure decided on documents without a full trial — imposing a fine of 3 million won. He contested the order and requested a formal trial, but the outcome did not change.

The court found A guilty on all charges.

"Taking into account all factors — including the circumstances that led to the stalking, the nature and frequency of the acts, A's age, character, environment, and conduct after the offense — a fine of 3 million won appears appropriate," the court said in its ruling. "There has been no change in circumstances since the summary order that would warrant a different sentence, so the fine set in that order is maintained."

Lawyers who reviewed the ruling said the conviction was grounded in the fact that A continued to make contact after the victim had clearly expressed her refusal, even if some may debate whether the law's reach is being stretched too far.

Chae Da-eun, an attorney at law firm Hanjung, said courts have recently placed greater weight on the intent behind contact than on the sheer number of messages when assessing stalking charges. "Given that A continued to reach out through social media against the victim's wishes after she had directly refused his request for her contact information, the charges were found to be established," Chae said.

Hwang Seong-hyeon, an attorney at law office Hwaksin, shared a similar view. While acknowledging that questions may arise about whether the law's scope is becoming too broad, Hwang said, "What may feel like a light expression of interest or a simple greeting to the sender can amount to repeated anxiety and burden for the recipient — and that is what the court took into account in finding this to be stalking."

The ruling is now final. Neither A nor the prosecution appealed the first-instance decision.