"Considering Victim's Demands and Perpetrator's IQ"
Prosecution: "Simply Killing in Anger... Harsher Punishment Needed"
A man in his 60s serving a life sentence for two previous murders committed another murder during his parole period. When the court once again sentenced him to life imprisonment for this case, the prosecution appealed.
On the 1st, the Criminal Division 1 of the Namyangju Branch of Uijeongbu District Prosecutors' Office (Chief Prosecutor Yoo Jeong-hyun) appealed against the first trial verdict that sentenced defendant Kang (64) to life imprisonment on charges of murder. The prosecution stated, "The defendant has a history of being punished twice for murder since his teenage years and committed a third murder after being paroled while serving a life sentence," adding, "Considering that he killed the victim simply because he was angry, a heavier sentence should be imposed." Before the first trial verdict, the prosecution requested the court to impose the death penalty on Kang.
In July 1979, Kang strangled to death a 10-year-old girl who teased him and hid her body. However, as a juvenile offender under criminal law, he was not subject to a heavy sentence and was sentenced by Jeonju District Court to a long-term imprisonment of 5 years and a short-term imprisonment of 3 years. In October 1986, when a male partner he was dating said he wanted to break up, Kang killed him in the same manner and was sentenced to life imprisonment.
Kang was imprisoned in Mokpo Prison for over 30 years and was paroled in October 2017 while wearing an electronic ankle bracelet. After his parole, Kang met a man in his 20s, Mr. A, and from July last year, they lived together at Mr. A's house in Namyangju City. In September of the same year, when Mr. A suddenly touched Kang's genitals and demanded pocket money at the house, Kang was indicted on charges of strangling Mr. A to death after a dispute.
On the 25th of last month, the first trial court sentenced Kang to life imprisonment and ordered him to wear an electronic ankle bracelet for 30 years. The court explained the sentencing reason, saying, "The defendant committed the crime while on parole and under probation wearing an electronic ankle bracelet, ignoring all measures to prevent recidivism," and "The blameworthiness is great, and severe punishment is appropriate." The court further stated, "However, considering that the victim engaged in unwanted physical contact and demanded money, and that the defendant's intelligence quotient is at the lowest level, it is judged that a sentence permanently isolating him from society is more appropriate than a sentence depriving life itself."
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
