From a transposed number to a tattoo - when a tattoo becomes grievous bodily harm

Tattoos are actually a form of self-realisation - at best. But what happens if a tattoo is applied against the wishes of the person concerned - and in the centre of their face? The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) issued a clear judgement on this in April 2025. It is about revenge, disfigurement and the question of when a tattoo becomes grievous bodily harm (§ 226 StGB).

1 The case: A tattoo for revenge

What sounds like a scene from a bad film actually happened: a man wanted to have the number sequence „1312“ - a code for „All Cops Are Bastards“ - tattooed on the back of his finger. However, the tattoo artist mistyped it and accidentally engraved „1213“. The later defendant, who had himself tattooed, found this mistake not only embarrassing, but also a massive provocation. His reaction: in revenge, he tattooed the word „FUCK“ about 1.5 x 4.5 cm above the tattoo artist's right eyebrow - clearly visible on his face.

The injured party had not previously had a tattoo on his face, nor had he consented to the tattoo. He has suffered considerably from the situation ever since, wears his hair in his face to hide the tattoo and simply cannot afford laser treatment.

2. legal assessment: bodily injury with serious consequences

Even the unintentional engraving of a tattoo fulfils the offence of Bodily injury (§ 223 StGB). Because it is a physical abuse, that impairs physical integrity. But the case went further - the central question was: Is it also a case of grievous bodily harm according to § 226 para. 1 no. 3 Alt. 1 StGB?

The BGH's answer: Yes.

According to this provision, grievous bodily harm exists if the victim is „significantly and permanently disfigured“. And that is precisely the case here: according to the BGH, a conspicuous, vulgar tattoo on the face constitutes a significant and permanent disfigurement - even if it would theoretically be possible to remove it later using a laser.

3. permanent disfigurement despite possible laser therapy?

The Bochum Regional Court initially did not share this view. It was of the opinion that the disfigurement was not „permanent“ because the tattoo could, in principle, be removed. However, the BGH clarified this: The decisive factor is the situation at the time of the judgement of the first instance.

At the time of the judgement, the injured party had not started laser treatment - primarily for financial reasons. And that is exactly what counts. After all, the possibility of cosmetic correction does not make the disfigurement any less significant under criminal law. In addition, the BGH emphasised that the word „FUCK“ in particular is considered to be particularly socially stigmatising is perceived. The tattoo has a massive impact on the outward appearance and social standing of the person affected.

Another point: The defendant acted intentionally, to punish and publicly humiliate the injured party. This also speaks in favour of the classification as grievous bodily harm.

4. significance for practice: new standards for disfigurement caused by tattoos

The judgement of the BGH has a signal effect: Tattoos on the face against the will of the person concerned can be used not only as simple, but even as grievous bodily harm are to be assessed. Especially if they permanently and significantly change the appearance - as in the case of a conspicuous tattoo in the visible area with offensive content.

Important: The BGH clarifies that even the theoretical possibility of removal by cosmetic measures (laser treatment etc.) is irrelevant if it is not utilised for financial or other reasons.

This means for criminal law practice: The threshold for grievous bodily harm can be crossed more quickly than previously assumed - particularly in the case of visible and stigmatising interventions in the external appearance.

If you need criminal law support or are yourself affected by a personal injury, we are at your disposal at our offices in Sulingen, Bremen, Osnabrück or online. We will advise you competently, discreetly and individually - even in complex cases such as this one.

FAQ on this topic

1. is a tattoo always a bodily injury?
Not necessarily. A tattoo is only a bodily injury if it against the will of the data subject.

2 What does „permanent disfigurement“ mean in criminal law?
Permanent disfigurement occurs when the external appearance of a person is long-term and significantly changed is visible - e.g. through scars or conspicuous tattoos on the face.

3. does it matter whether the tattoo can be removed later?
According to the BGH: No. The decisive factor is the condition at the time of the court decision - and whether the person concerned is actually considering the removal or can afford it financially.

4. can even a small tattoo be considered grievous bodily harm?
Yes, if they visible and socially stigmatising e.g. insults to the face or other prominent parts of the body.

5 What is the penalty for grievous bodily harm caused by a tattoo?
In the case of grievous bodily harm according to § 226 StGB Prison sentences of at least three years - even more in particularly serious cases.