[Seocho-dong Legal Story] "The Person Who Loved Me... Had No Intention to Kill"

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] "I loved this person. Thanks to her, I lived like a human being. No one has ever treated me this well in my life. She told me, 'If you live like this, you will achieve nothing. You need to study.'"(Defendant)

On the 17th of last month, in a courtroom on the 5th floor of the Seoul High Court, the 54-year-old defendant A, dressed in a yellow prison uniform, spoke these words. He was on trial for the appeal after being sentenced to 13 years in prison in the first trial for the murder of 'this person' B (60, female), whom he claimed to have loved.

"Thanks to her, I passed the qualification exams for the GED and caregiver license... I had no motive to kill the woman I loved"

A had a family in the past but separated from them, leaving the child with his legal wife. Later, he met B and lived together with her from July 2019. With B’s help, he consecutively passed the GED and the caregiver certification exams. They deeply loved each other.

However, they often quarreled. B showed signs of morbid jealousy, and whenever she scolded A, he would get very angry. Their unstable cohabitation continued, with eight 112 emergency calls reporting A’s assault on B. On January 6th at 4:25 p.m., the crime occurred during a quarrel. “I know you’re going to leave. Don’t go to another woman, go back to the mother of your child!” said B, to which A suddenly stood up and grabbed a weapon from the kitchen.

Twenty-three minutes later, a 119 text emergency call was received. "Couple fight, stabbed with a knife". It was sent by A himself. When the paramedics arrived, B had died from excessive bleeding. A told the police who followed that he stabbed her. However, in court, he said, "I don’t remember clearly." After the crime, A left the house for seven minutes, returned, and then reported the incident 16 minutes later. The prosecution judged that he left B, who was stabbed, unattended for tens of minutes before reporting.

On the other hand, A’s defense acknowledged "the defendant’s actions caused the victim’s death" but emphasized "the intent to kill should be carefully considered." They argued that since he would not have intentionally killed the person he loved so much, this should be taken into account in sentencing.

Defendant: "I drank beyond my limit and don’t remember"… 2nd trial court: "No recognition of diminished capacity"

The defense also argued, "The defendant should have reported sooner, but the time frame does not suggest concealment of the body or other intentions." They claimed that A’s livelihood was precarious without B, and since they were not legally married, he could not claim property rights from the start. They requested consideration of the fact that he committed the crime in a state of 'diminished capacity' due to intoxication.

Judge: Are you also claiming diminished capacity as a reason for appeal that alleges 'factual and legal errors in the original ruling'?

Defense: We are not claiming innocence, but we ask for a thorough re-examination of the autopsy results and evidence.

A also strongly blamed himself, saying, "I should not have drunk."

Defendant: The primary fault is that I don’t remember (the situation). Secondly, I shouldn’t have drunk, but I did that day. I do not forgive myself.

Judge: How much did you drink?

Defendant: I drank two bottles of soju. Usually, my limit is half to one bottle.

Judge: Then why did you drink two bottles?

Defendant: I was waiting for her. I was scared because I knew we would fight when B came home that day.

Judge: Then you shouldn’t have drunk. Why did you?

Defendant: If only I hadn’t drunk that alcohol...

On the 9th, the Seoul High Court Criminal Division 3 (Presiding Judge Park Yeonwook) dismissed A’s appeal, rejecting claims of improper sentencing.

The court stated, "CCTV footage outside the entrance shows the defendant’s behavior does not appear intoxicated," and "He cannot be considered to have had impaired ability to distinguish or decide." It added, "During police investigation, he gave a detailed explanation of the circumstances at the time of the crime, which contradicts his claim of not remembering." A announced on the 13th that he would forgo further appeal.