Song Min-ho, convicted of violating Military Service Act, faces controversy over 'fairness' regarding 102-day re-service

As WINNER's Song Min-ho, who absented himself for 102 days out of approximately 430 total working days, undergoes re-service procedures, public criticism is intensifying. Although a suspended prison sentence was finalized for violating the Military Service Act, the controversy stems from the fact that the period he must serve again is only the 102 days he absented himself. Online, heated reactions such as "He should serve from the beginning" and "What kind of punishment is 102 days?" have poured in, reigniting the debate surrounding the fairness of military duty.

Regarding Song Min-ho's re-service, the Military Manpower Administration stated on the 16th, "As the first-instance verdict has been finalized, we are currently reviewing the progress of re-service procedures." Previously, on the 1st, the Seoul Western District Court Criminal Division 10 sentenced Song Min-ho, who was indicted on charges of violating the Military Service Act, to one year in prison with a two-year suspension of execution. The verdict was finalized as Song Min-ho did not appeal. While the criminal trial has concluded, another debate has emerged regarding how to fulfill the military duty resulting from the unauthorized absence.

Song Min-ho served as a social service agent at a facility management corporation and a community convenience facility in Mapo-gu, Seoul, from March 2023 to December 2024. However, during the prosecution's investigation, it was revealed that he absented himself without justifiable reason for 102 days out of approximately 430 total working days. This period accounts for about one-fourth of his total working days. In particular, it was investigated that in July 2024, he attended work for only 4 days out of 23 working days and absented himself for the remaining 19 days, leading to increased criticism regarding service management and responsibility.

While acknowledging the fact of the service desertion, the court sentenced him to a suspended prison sentence, considering that Song Min-ho admitted to the charges and expressed remorse, and that his health condition appeared to have influenced his service. However, as news spread that re-service procedures would be pursued after the verdict was finalized, public opinion is not easily calming down. Rather than the fact itself that he must fulfill his military duty again separately from criminal punishment, the focus of criticism is on the fact that the period is only equal to the number of days he absented himself.

Intense reactions continued online, such as "Shouldn't he serve from the beginning instead of just 102 days?" and "He should do 1 year and 6 months again." Some netizens raised issues of fairness, asking, "Is it over just by filling the days he missed even if he gets caught?" and "Would the same result have occurred if an ordinary person had done the same thing?" However, these are claims made by netizens regarding the method of re-service and the appropriateness of the punishment, and not all public opinion holds the same position.

The core of the controversy lies in whether merely filling the period of unauthorized absence is a sufficient way to hold someone accountable for fulfilling their military duty. As military duty is accepted not only as a matter of personal circumstances but also as a matter of social trust and fairness, service violation cases involving celebrities are prone to stricter standards and public scrutiny than general criminal cases. In particular, as voices calling for consideration of fairness with those who completed their service faithfully grow louder, the debate surrounding the re-service period is also intensifying.

The Military Manpower Administration is currently reviewing follow-up procedures for re-service, and the specific service location and schedule have not yet been determined. Song Min-ho is expected to fulfill the military duty corresponding to the 102 days he absented himself. Following the finalization of the suspended sentence in the criminal trial and the subsequent progress of re-service procedures, the issue of legal responsibility is being settled, but it remains uncertain whether the controversy over fairness raised by the public will be resolved. Ultimately, this matter reveals how large a gap exists between the established legal procedures and the level of responsibility expected by the public.

Read the original (Korean)