Pubdate: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 Source: Korea Times (South Korea) Copyright: 2006 The Hankookilbo Contact: http://times.hankooki.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/916 Author: Sean Hayes Note: American Attorney Sean Hayes is a law professor at Kookmin University and a Researcher at the Constitutional Court. LAW LEAVES LITTLE ROOM FOR ENTRAPMENT ARGUMENT Dear Professor Hayes: I was the victim of entrapment. I was viewing a message board about concerts in Seoul. One posting on the board said that they were interested in knowing where to purchase marijuana. I heard of a person who sold marijuana near Hongik University so I left my e-mail and said we can go together and purchase the marijuana together. When we arranged a meeting it was the police. I am facing time in jail, embarrassment, and a lot of costs. I looked up the word in an English dictionary and I think this is entrapment. Can you use this type of argument in Korea? Worried-Korean College Student. Dear Worried: First, as you know, the drugs laws in Korea are very strict, and all Korean and foreigners should refrain from associating with people who use drugs, going to establishments were drugs are sold or used, and using any form of illegal drugs, including marijuana. Many first time marijuana users have spent time in jail. Over the years in Korea, I have seen too many naive young people caught with drugs in their possession or within their system. If you are intent on using drugs, leave Korea. You will eventually be caught and the punishment will be, at a minimum, a large legal bill and/or large fine. If you are a foreigner don't expect to work in Korea in the near future. Secondly, Worried, yes in Korea you can argue the defense of entrapment. The key to the defense is the successful assertion by the defendant that he or she was induced to commit the crime and that he or she was not predisposed to committing the crime. The Korean Supreme Court clarified this rule in a case disposed of in the Fall of 2005. The Court acknowledged that entrapment likely occurred in a case that concerned a paid informant and the smuggling of drugs from China to Korea. The informant, according to the defendants, asserted that the importation of the drugs was to assist the government efforts to fight drug trafficking. The defendants further contended that consistent persuasion of the informant led to them accepting and assisting in trafficking drugs. The prosecution essentially agreed with most of the defendants asserted facts, but contended that the defendants were predisposed to committing the crime and thus had the requisite intent. The Supreme Court, in short, acknowledged that the defendants may have been induced and the prosecutor's argument of predisposition to the commit the crime was not proven. So yes, worried, it is a possible defense in Korea, but in your case you will fight an up hill battle. The inducement is minimal, at best, and the prosecutors will have a decent argument that your were predisposed since they didn't engage in any positive persuasion and that your curiosity and knowledge of where to purchase drugs proves your disposition. Worried, in most cases, the best solution to similar cases is to hire a very good lawyer, cooperate with the police and prosecutor and pray to the almighty God. - --- MAP posted-by: Elaine