Gaslighting Seen Through the 'Valley Murder': Analysis of 10 Court Rulings

Court sentencing reasons specified since last year
6 cases of gaslighting crimes recognized over 3 years
'Gyegok Murder' not recognized in first trial

Since last year, courts have begun citing gaslighting-based crimes (Gaslighting: psychological domination) as a reason for sentencing. There are conflicting opinions on whether legislation is needed because such crimes can lead to serious offenses like murder, or whether it should be left to judicial discretion.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Oh Gyumin] In February, the Seoul Southern District Court Criminal Division 13 (Chief Judge Lee Sangju) sentenced A (21), who was indicted on charges including fraud, quasi-rape, extortion, and assault against a high school classmate, to six years in prison. According to the court, A is accused of deceiving victim B (21) in early July 2019 by falsely claiming, "Your computer and phone are being hacked, so if you give me money, I will talk to a friend who knows about hacking and protect you," thereby embezzling 950,000 won. He is also accused of assaulting B multiple times for being late to appointments and committing quasi-rape through threats six times starting from April last year.

The court stated the sentencing rationale, saying, "It appears that A committed the crimes while psychologically controlling a victim who was physically and mentally vulnerable compared to himself (so-called 'gaslighting crime'), and B experienced extreme sexual shame and humiliation, making the blameworthiness very high."

Since last year, courts have begun citing gaslighting-based crimes as a reason for sentencing. There is a conflict of opinion between those who argue that legislation is necessary because such crimes can lead to serious offenses like murder, and those who believe it should be left to judicial discretion.

Gaslighting Crime Verdicts Continue... ‘Valley Murder’ Not Recognized

According to a compilation of our reporting, there have been a total of 10 court rulings mentioning 'gaslighting' in the Supreme Court judgment review service over the past three years. The term 'gaslighting' began appearing in rulings from June last year, with six cases involving gaslighting-based crimes. Half of these six cases occurred in relationships where the parties were lovers or former lovers.

In November last year, C was sentenced to one year in prison for threatening a victim he had been dating for six years after being released from prison, saying things like, "I will kill the man you are seeing now." Similarly, Judge Shin Dongwoong of the Uijeongbu District Court Criminal Division 2 stated, "During the breakup process, the defendant induced guilt in the victim to manipulate her psychology, a so-called 'gaslighting,' and caused serious mental distress by threatening harm to the victim and those around her."

In the ‘Valley Murder Case,’ which attracted attention as the prosecution claimed it was a direct murder caused by gaslighting, the court did not accept this. The Incheon District Court Criminal Division 15 (Chief Judge Lee Gyuhun) judged that it was difficult to conclude that the victim was psychologically controlled or dominated to the extent that she could not refuse or resist Lee Eunhae’s demands. However, the court recognized indirect murder by omission, sentencing the defendants to life imprisonment and other heavy penalties, citing reasons such as the defendants’ failure to rescue the victim submerged in water, two previous attempts to kill the victim, and the planned nature of the crime.

There is an opinion that legislation is necessary because gaslighting crimes can lead to violent crimes. On the other hand, some argue that it may violate the principle of legality and should be left to the jurisdiction of the courts and prosecution.

"Insufficient Punishment Basis... Need for Legislation" vs. "Contrary to Principle of Legality"

Gaslighting refers to a perpetrator manipulating another person's psychology and circumstances to make the victim doubt themselves and exert control. In this process, the perpetrator commits repeated abuse based on an asymmetrical power relationship. The victim becomes isolated from the outside and instead becomes dependent on the perpetrator, which can escalate to physical violence, fraud, murder, and other serious crimes.

For this reason, there are opinions that legislation is necessary rather than leaving it to judicial discretion. Professor Lee Sujeong of the Department of Criminal Psychology at Kyonggi University stated in 'A Comparison of the Psychological Mechanisms of Gaslighting and Stalking,' "In cases of emotional abuse-based gaslighting, it is difficult to establish a crime and there is insufficient basis for punishment because related laws such as those on dating violence have not been enacted. It is also difficult to consider gaslighting occurring in intimate relationships as domestic violence."

On the other hand, some argue that it is difficult to concretize psychological phenomena and that legislating gaslighting could violate the principle of legality. Researcher Seung Jaehyun of the Korea Institute of Criminal Justice Policy said, "If legislation punishes acts committed as a result of gaslighting, it could violate the clarity of the elements of the offense," and added, "The prosecution should make every effort to prove gaslighting, and it should be left to the judge’s discretion."