Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42588992›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2026

Companion-Animal Abuse in South Korea: Welfare and Veterinary Implications from Criminal-Court Decisions (2003-2025).

Ah-Young Kim, Ji-Su Baek, BokKyung Ku, Kyunghyun Lee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ah-Young KimAnimal Disease Diagnostic Division, Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency, Gimcheon 39660, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-0600-1816
Ji-Su BaekAnimal Disease Diagnostic Division, Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency, Gimcheon 39660, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5962-7404
BokKyung KuAnimal Disease Diagnostic Division, Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency, Gimcheon 39660, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1892-8910
Kyunghyun LeeAnimal Disease Diagnostic Division, Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency, Gimcheon 39660, Republic of Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-1432-6015

Funding

Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency I-1543069-2026-28-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animal abuse directly compromises companion-animal welfare, causing pain, injury, neglect, and, in many cases, death. Although veterinary case series and welfare surveys offer clinical perspectives, far less is known about how abuse is documented in criminal-court decisions. This study analyzed 501 publicly available judgments issued under the South Korean Animal Protection Act between 2003 and 2025 to characterize the species involved, the abusive acts described, sentencing outcomes, and the visibility of veterinary information. Dogs were the predominant victims (63.9%), followed by a heterogeneous group of other or unspecified species (22.1%) and cats (14.0%). Blunt-force trauma (beating, kicking, or hitting with objects) was the most common coded act (92.0%), whereas neglect-related death (3.0%), asphyxiation (2.6%), and sharp-force trauma (2.4%) were recorded far less frequently. Most offenders received monetary fines (64.5%), with custodial sentences imposed in 14.1% of cases. Veterinary information was not consistently visible in the public legal record; a minimum of 7 of 501 decisions (1.4%) contained an unambiguous, explicit reference to veterinary involvement, and this floor estimate likely understates the true frequency, because many appellate summaries omitted the factual detail needed to determine whether veterinary records or expert opinions had been presented at earlier stages. The results therefore characterize how prosecuted abuse is represented in publicly accessible court records rather than the full spectrum of animal abuse or the severity of suffering experienced by the animals. When situated within the limited but growing international literature, the South Korean findings resemble other judgment-based datasets in foregrounding overt violence more readily than chronic or diffuse forms of welfare harm.

Indexed as

Animal Protection Actanimal welfarecompanion animal abusecriminal court decisionssentencingSouth Korea

Identifiers

PMID42588992
PMCPMC13463502

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.