One of South Korea's best-known actresses was convicted of adultery yesterday in a high-profile case that drew fresh attention to a law banning extramarital affairs.
Ok So-ri, who was handed a suspended jail term, had lost a battle in October to have the ban declared unconstitutional.
"I would like to say I'm sorry for causing so much trouble to society," Ok said after the verdict.
A district court in Goyang, near Seoul, handed Ok a suspended eight-month jail sentence, meaning she will not serve time. Her lover received a six-month suspended term.
The sensational sex-and-celebrities case has been tabloid fodder for months, with Ok's challenge to the adultery law adding extra spice.
Last year, Ok acknowledged in a news conference that she had had an affair with an opera singer who was a friend of her husband in 2006. She stressed the affair was a result of her loveless marriage to actor Park Chul.
The court appeared to show some sympathy.
"Though the fact of adultery should be criticised, the court issued this ruling taking into account that husband Park Chul's responsibility was not small," the court said.
Ok also "suffered mental pains" from the invasion of her privacy, the court said.
Ok earlier this year filed a petition to have the adultery ban ruled an unconstitutional invasion of privacy. However, in October, the constitutional court upheld the ban, part of South Korea's 55-year-old criminal code.
Despite decades of Western influence, South Korea remains deeply conservative. Those convicted under the adultery law face prison sentences of up to two years, though few serve time.
Supporters of the ban say it promotes monogamy and keeps families intact. Opponents say it violates privacy.
Many Muslim nations have anti-adultery laws. Taiwan, Austria, Switzerland and some US states also have laws prohibiting extramarital affairs.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article