STRICT RULING ON ANIMAL ABUSE CASE

[Anchor Lead]

The court handed down a sentence of six months in prison to a man in his 30s for torturing and killing a cat at a cafe. This ruling is far different from the fine and probation sentences usually given to animal abuse cases.

[Pkg]

A man in 30s was caught bashing a cat on the ground and stomping on the feline at a cafe along the Gyeongui line in Seoul last July. The court ruled that the man be sentenced to six months in prison and had him remanded into custody. It is highly unusual for the court to hand down an actual prison term for violating the Animal Protection Act. The court explained that the crime was extremely brutal and showed no respect for life. The judges also added that the man had abused an innocent cat just because he didn't like cats.

[Soundbite] PARK SEUNG-HYE(PUBLICITY JUDGE, SEOUL WESTERN DISTRICT COURT) : "The ruling is a warning to all those who take the value of life lightly. The sentencing was influenced by the victim's adamant stance, unwilling to forgive the perpetrator's actions and demand for heavy punishment."

In the past two and a half years, 119 cases went to trial for violating the Animal Protection Act, but only three cases received actual prison sentences, sparking criticism that penalties were insufficient. The owner of the dead cat welcomed the court's decision, yet she was disappointed by the short prison term.

[Soundbite] (OWNER OF THE KILLED CAT) : "Frankly, I think a six-month sentencing is too short. The Animal Protection Act should be strengthened so that there won't be any more tortured or abused cats."

Animal rights activists argue that the latest ruling should spark a change in the legal system in regards to animal abuse cases.

[Soundbite] SEO GUK-HWA(PRESIDENT, PEOPLE FOR NON-HUMAN RIGHTS) : "Currently, there is no Supreme Court sentencing guideline for animal abuse cases. I hope this case would prompt the court to set up official criteria for animal abuse."

The prosecution, which had asked for 18 months in prison, plan to decide on whether to appeal after reviewing the ruling.