Hwaseong Breeding Facility Owner Sentenced to 18 Months in Prison for Killing Mother Dog While Raising 1,400 Dogs

92 Dog Carcasses Discovered in Freezer
Court Cites "Extreme Disregard for Life"

A dog breeding facility owner who was put on trial for charges including surgically removing puppies by cutting open the abdomen of a live mother dog and illegally euthanizing sick dogs has been sentenced to prison in the first trial.

According to Yonhap News Agency on July 15, Judge Seo Jinwon of the Criminal Division 10 (Single Judge) at the Suwon District Court sentenced former breeding facility owner, identified as Mr. A, to one year and six months in prison and a fine of 3 million won for violating the Animal Protection Act, the Veterinary License Act, and the Building Act. Mr. B, who was also indicted as part of the management team, was sentenced to one year and two months in prison. The court ordered the immediate detention of Mr. A and Mr. B in the courtroom, citing concerns about the risk of flight upon conviction.

Another member of the management team, Mr. C, received a sentence of one year in prison, suspended for three years, while employees Mr. D and Mr. E were each sentenced to eight months in prison, suspended for two years. They were also ordered to perform 120 to 200 hours of community service.

Mr. A and others were indicted without physical detention on charges of operating a dog breeding facility in Hwaseong, Gyeonggi Province, from May 2022 to August 2023, and performing fatal abdominal surgeries on live mother dogs despite lacking veterinary licenses. They were also accused of illegally euthanizing 15 elderly dogs suffering from infectious diseases by administering muscle relaxants, as well as administering vaccines and antibiotics without a valid license for self-treatment.

Although they kept as many as 1,400 dogs, it was found that the number of caretakers was grossly insufficient. Police dispatched in response to the initial report discovered the bodies of 92 dogs wrapped in newspaper in a freezer at the facility.

During the trial, Mr. A and the others denied the charges, arguing that “the mother dog was already dead, and even if she had been alive, it qualifies as necessity or a justifiable act to save the puppies.”

However, the court dismissed all of their claims, citing, for example, disease diagnosis results from the Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency. The court said, “Considering that bleeding and inflammatory cells were observed within the skin tissue after the incision, there is no reasonable doubt that the mother dog was alive at the time of the surgery.” The court went on to add, “Even if there was an intent to save the puppies, performing an immediate abdominal incision on the spot without taking appropriate steps, such as transferring the animal to a veterinary clinic, cannot be permitted under accepted social norms.”

The charge of illegal euthanasia of elderly dogs by administration of muscle relaxants was also found guilty. The court explained, “It is acknowledged that, under management instructions, sick or old dogs were euthanized, and this cannot be seen as justified cause or necessity.” On the charge of administering vaccines without a veterinary license, the court added, “Companion dogs cannot be regarded as livestock, so such self-treatment as allowed for livestock breeding cannot be justified.”

In stating the reasons for sentencing, the court said, “It is a form of extreme disregard for life to take animal lives for economic gain, making the illegality and blameworthiness of the conduct very serious. However, consideration was given to the fact that some of the crimes were acknowledged, employees acted at the direction of superiors, and they had no prior criminal history.”

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.