Accused of Quasi-Rape After Drinking in Korea: When Both Sides Had Been Drinking
Written by Attorney Soobin You, a former prosecutor licensed in Korea, defending criminal cases with consultations available in English.
Quick answer: In Korea, “quasi-rape (준강간)” means engaging in sexual relations by taking advantage of a state in which the other person could not resist, for example due to intoxication. But intoxication alone does not establish the offense. The law requires that the person was actually unable to resist, and that the accused knew and exploited this. Where both sides had been drinking and the interaction showed mutual will, a case can end in no charges (불송치). That is how one case was resolved.
For foreigners in Korea, this is one of the most misunderstood and dangerous areas of the law. A night where both people had been drinking can later become a criminal accusation. Here is how the law actually works, and how one case was defended, from a Korean English-speaking lawyer’s perspective.
What quasi-rape actually requires
Quasi-rape is the crime of having sexual relations by exploiting a person’s inability to resist, such as a state of intoxication or unconsciousness. The key point that is often misunderstood is this: the mere fact that someone had been drinking does not, by itself, establish the offense.
Two elements must be met. The person must have actually been in a state where they could not resist. And the accused must have recognized that state and taken advantage of it. Simply having consumed alcohol is not enough. It must be shown that the person had genuinely lost the ability to resist. This is why these cases are decided by a close, objective analysis of the specific circumstances.
The case background
In this case, both the client and the other person had been drinking together, and a sexual relationship followed. Afterward, the other person filed a complaint alleging quasi-rape. The core issue was whether the other person had truly been in a state of being unable to resist, and whether the client had exploited that state.
Because both parties had been drinking, and the interaction leading up to the event suggested mutual will, we focused on objectively reconstructing the actual circumstances rather than accepting a one-sided account.
The defense strategy
We concentrated on the objective evidence surrounding the event. We reviewed the messages exchanged between the two before and after, their movements, CCTV where available, and the consistency of the other person’s account, organizing whether the other person had in fact been in a state of inability to resist.
Where both people have been drinking, the degree of intoxication and whether someone could resist must be judged with particular care. We set out, with objective materials, the indications that the other person had been capable of normal conversation and decision-making, and that the interaction reflected mutual will. We also analyzed the consistency and specificity of the complainant’s statement in detail, presenting the points that were difficult to credit through a written opinion.
The result: no charges
In the end, investigators concluded that it was difficult to find that the other person had been in a state of inability to resist, or that the client had exploited such a state, and issued a no-charge (불송치) decision. This outcome rested on a precise, objective analysis of the circumstances rather than on assertion.
Why these cases demand a careful early response
Quasi-rape cases involving alcohol are among the most delicate in criminal practice. Whether a person could resist is not decided by the amount of alcohol alone, but by many circumstances taken together. And once a complaint is filed, the initial statement heavily shapes the direction of the case, which makes an early, careful, and objective response essential. Facing this kind of investigation without preparation is genuinely risky. Analyzing the objective circumstances and responding with evidence is what protects you.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Is it automatically quasi-rape in Korea if the other person had been drinking?
A: No. Intoxication alone does not establish the offense. The law requires that the person was actually unable to resist, and that the accused recognized and exploited that state. These are judged by the specific circumstances.
Q: What if both people had been drinking?
A: Then the degree of intoxication and the capacity to resist must be assessed carefully for the specific situation. Evidence that the other person could converse and make decisions normally, and that the interaction reflected mutual will, can be important.
Q: What evidence matters in these cases?
A: Messages before and after, movements, CCTV where available, and the consistency and specificity of the complainant’s account, all used to objectively reconstruct whether the person was truly unable to resist.
Q: What does a no-charge (불송치) decision mean?
A: It means the police concluded the case does not warrant referral to the prosecutor. The case ends at the police stage, with no trial, no conviction, and no criminal record from that matter.
Q: I’m a foreigner facing this kind of accusation in Korea. Can I get help in English?
A: Yes. A Korean English-speaking lawyer can take your account in English and build an objective, evidence-based response from the earliest stage, which is critical when the initial statement can shape the whole case.
This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Outcomes depend on the specific facts of each case. This is a sensitive legal area. Consult a licensed attorney about your situation.
Under investigation for a sensitive case in Korea? YUSU Law Firm (법무법인 유수), founded by former prosecutor Soobin You, with a team that includes Kyungmin Kim, a US-educated Korean attorney, provides English-language criminal defense from the earliest stage. With offices in Seoul (Mapo) and Gyeongju, contact us via KakaoTalk or the inquiry form.