Former Major Law Firm Attorney Sentenced to 25 Years for Killing Wife During Divorce Proceedings

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal, Finds No Misinterpretation of Legal Principles

A former attorney from a major law firm in the United States, who is a Korean national, has been sentenced to 25 years in prison for murdering his wife.

A, a former attorney from a major law firm in the United States, accused of murdering his wife by striking her with a blunt object, is attending a pre-arrest suspect hearing (warrant review) held at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu in December 2023. Photo by Yonhap News

On April 24, the First Division of the Supreme Court, presided over by Justice Seo Kyunghwan, upheld the lower court’s ruling that sentenced A to 25 years in prison. The court stated, "There was no violation of the rules of logic and experience, nor any misinterpretation of legal principles that would exceed the limits of judicial discretion in the lower court’s judgment."

A was indicted and detained on charges of murdering his wife in December 2023 at their residence in Sajik-dong, Jongno-gu, Seoul. After filing for divorce and living separately, his wife visited the residence to retrieve their daughter's bag. A struck her multiple times on the head and other areas with a blunt object and then strangled her. It was reported that A had resigned from the major law firm in Korea shortly before the incident occurred.

The case became controversial when it was revealed that A’s father is a former multi-term National Assembly member and a former prosecutor. During the trial, A’s defense argued that the crime was impulsive and committed under diminished mental capacity, but the court did not accept this claim.

The court of first instance stated, "The method of the crime was extremely brutal. Beyond the cruelty of the act itself, the crime was committed in a situation where the son, born to the victim, was in close proximity and could hear his mother dying." The court sentenced A to 25 years in prison. In December of last year, the appellate court also upheld the first-instance ruling, stating, "Even if the initial blow to the victim was impulsive or unplanned, the continued merciless and brutal actions, as well as leaving the victim unattended for more than 50 minutes, reflect a strong and persistent intent to kill."

A appealed the decision, but the Supreme Court found no fault with the lower court’s ruling and dismissed the appeal.