A working dataset
of unequal sentences.

JusticeLens Korea began as a high-school research project asking a single question: when the same offense produces wildly different sentences, is the proportionality principle still doing its job?

We collect publicly reported Korean sentencing outcomes — bus drivers fired for taking ₩2,400, chaebol heirs given suspended sentences for billions, sitting judges reprimanded for the same DUI that costs an ordinary citizen a fine and a license — and we put them next to each other.

The goal is not to argue every case was decided wrong. It is to make the patterns legible: where mitigators flow only one way, where bright-line thresholds are designed around, and where presidential pardons quietly undo years of judicial deliberation.

The work is journalistic and educational — not legal advice. Every case links to its source. Every claim is checkable. Where empirical patterns are reported, the underlying datasets are cited.