[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] The bereaved family of the victim in the 'Seoul Junggok-dong Housewife Murder Case' will receive compensation from the state after about 11 years.
On the afternoon of the 1st, the Civil Division 19-2 of the Seoul High Court (Presiding Judges Kim Dongwan, Bae Yongjun, Jeong Seunggyu) ruled partially in favor of the plaintiffs in the retrial of the damages claim lawsuit filed by the deceased's husband and children against the state. The court ordered the state to pay approximately 93.75 million KRW in damages to the victim's husband and about 60 million KRW each to the two children.
Previously, the victim of the 'Junggok-dong Murder Case' (aged 37 at the time) was killed by Seo Jinhwan at her home in Junggok-dong, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul on August 20, 2012. Seo Jinhwan was tried for this case and received a life sentence confirmed in 2013.
The bereaved family claimed that Seo Jinhwan had already been sentenced to seven years in prison for a sexual assault committed with a weapon in 2004, was released in August 2011 while wearing an electronic monitoring device (electronic anklet), and then murdered Ms. B. They argued that this occurred due to illegal performance of duties by investigative and probation officers and filed a state compensation claim against the government.
The first trial court judged that there was insufficient causal relationship between the police's fault and the murder of Ms. B. Although the police did not use location information from the electronic anklet in the investigation, they conducted other basic investigations thoroughly through CCTV, and thus dismissed the family's claim.
The second trial court acknowledged faults by the police and the probation office but ruled that it could not be considered a violation of laws. The investigation was conducted at the police's discretion based on professional judgment, and there was no guideline requiring the use of location information from the electronic anklet wearer. Also, considering that the probation office had regular meetings with Seo Jinhwan before the incident, the court ruled that responsibility could not be attributed to the police and probation office.
However, the Supreme Court stated, "The police's initial measures to confirm Seo Jinhwan's location near the crime scene were insufficient, and the probation officer's failure to conduct periodic supervision constitutes a significant fault and a violation of laws," and sent the case back to the Seoul High Court, partially recognizing the responsibility of the police and probation authorities.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
