2021 Requests for attachment order (combined)

Residence

Reference domicile

A 1 (No. 20), a gree (No. 31), a gree (No. 38), a gree (No. 39), a gree (No. 38), and a gree (No. 39) shall be confiscated.

To the person subject to the request for attachment order, the attachment of an electronic tracking device shall be ordered for 30 years.

Matters to be observed in the attached Form shall be imposed on the person who requested the attachment order during the period of attachment.

【Criminal Facts】

The defendant and the person who requested to attach an attachment order (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") are those who were married in around 1986 and divorced in around 1999 and were in a de facto marital relationship with the victim B (the age of 61) from around 2006.

1. homicide;

The Defendant, who works at a construction site, was unable to do so for a short period of time without a fixed import, caused approximately KRW 10,000,000, and was unable to do so due to drinking, and was made up of a letter that he would not drink, drink, or drink to the victim at the end of the dispute with the victim and the victim who did so.

Around November 20, 2020, the Defendant (around November 20, 2020), who received 3.5 million won from the victim to receive cafeterias, etc. from the victim, but did not use it to complete the cafeterias, etc., but used it in the main office, bank, etc.

On November 23, 2020, from around 05:13 to around 09:20 on November 25, 2020, the Defendant returned to a residential area located under CHousing D, Yangsan-si. When the Defendant spawd and spaddd from the victim’s inside the said residential area about drinking spadying and drinking spad from the victim’s night spadying and not repaid spady, the Defendant spad from the victim’s spady, and spad from the spady. However, the Defendant spad from the disregarding it, and spading the Defendant. The Defendant spadying the victim’s body and spadying the victim’s body and spading the victim’s body, caused the victim to die by leaving the victim’s body alone at the time of the death.

Accordingly, the Defendant murdered the victim.

2. Destruction of a corpse;

As stated in paragraph (1), the Defendant: (a) discovered the body of the victim in order to conceal the fact that the victim died; and (b) moved the body from the place of residence to the outside of the place of residence; and (c) abandoned the victim in a rare place.

After the crime of paragraph (1) has been committed on November 23, 2020 to November 25, 200, the defendant towed the body of the victim who died as above with a bath room, cut the body of the body heed with a knife (13cm in knife length, material of knife) by cutting the wide size of the nd bridge, cut the body part of the knife into the upper half of the knife, separate the knife from the upper half of the knife, cut the body from the upper part of the knife to the lower part, cut the body from the upper part of the knife to the lower part, cut the body from the upper part of the knife to the lower part, cut the body from the upper part of the knife to the upper part, cut the body from the upper part of the knife to the upper part, cut the body from the upper part of the knife to the body.

Accordingly, the defendant damaged the body of the victim.

3. Abandonment of a dead body.

(a) Abandonment of a corpse by drainage of a digging bridge on November 26, 2020;

On November 26, 2020, at around 19:09, the Defendant kept the left arms and the bridge part of the body divided as described in paragraph (2) of the above CHousing D together with the body of the body of the Defendant, which was loaded into the vinyl, and was loaded into the steel ice froat, after being sealed into the ice froat, and was loaded into the steel froat, at around 19:20 on the same day, the Defendant laid down the 55m of the ice froat into the froto of the steel froat road at the point where 55m of the froat frosat frosium

Accordingly, the defendant abandons the body of the victim.

(b) Abandoning of a nearby body on November 27, 2020;

On November 27, 2020, at around 15:48, the Defendant: (a) divided the body part of the body divided as described in paragraph (2) of the above CHousing D into two plastic bars; (b) the body part of the body part of the body part divided as described in paragraph (2) of the above C Housing D; (c) the Defendant stored one of the body part of the body part of the body part of the bar for travel; and (d) taken the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the Defendant stored in two plastic bars; and (d) moved the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the Defendant into the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the body part of the Defendant. At around 15:54 on the same day, the Defendant moved the body part of the body part of the Defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant abandons the body of the victim.

4. Fire-prevention and destruction of general goods and carcasses;

On December 8, 2020, the Defendant: (a) was aware of a dead body of abandonment as seen above; (b) was aware that the body was destroyed by fluencing the body; (c) was destroyed by fire; and (d) around 02:20 on the same day, the Defendant put the body into aground the body of the victim, as described in paragraph (1) of this Article, when the body was drained up to a drainage of the digging bridge on the road 39:0 p.m., the victim was abandoned, as described in paragraph (3) of this Article; and (c) the Defendant put the body into aground with a brub carried on a wall containing the left arms; and (d) around 02:31 on the same day, the Defendant put the body of the victim into aground that was abandoned as described in paragraph (b) of this Article.

As a result, the defendant damaged the body abandoned to the drainage of the digging bridge, damaged the body abandoned to the old Yangsan Association, and at the same time destroyed the waste, etc. corresponding to his own property, thereby causing public danger.

【Fact of Grounds for Attachment】

The defendant is a person who has committed murder as stated in paragraph (1) of the same Article and is in danger of recommitting such crime.

Summary of Evidence

(Omission)

1. The risk of repeating a crime as indicated in the judgment: (i) the Defendant appears to have lacking normal appraisal by taking account of the following circumstances, i.e., (Evidence omitted); (ii) the Defendant was punished for a period of eight years by imprisonment due to the injury or injury caused by the death of a female at the Daegu High Court on September 23, 1994; (iii) the Defendant’s psychological evaluation results on the Defendant’s psychological disorder and the risk of repeating a crime was assessed at a level of “high”; (iv) the Defendant’s psychological evaluation results on the Defendant’s psychological disorder and the risk of repeating a crime was assessed at a level of “high”; and (v) the Defendant’s mental disorder and the degree of dependence on the Defendant’s age is reasonable in view of the following factors:

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 250(1) of the Criminal Act (Murder), Article 161(1) of the Criminal Act (the use of death, bodily damage and abandonment), Article 167(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act (the use of general goods and fire prevention)

1. An ordinary concurrent crime:

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Punishment for the crimes of destroying and damaging a corpse under paragraph (4) of this Article and the crimes of destroying and damaging a corpse under paragraph (4) of this Article, and punishment for each crimes of causing severe punishment)

1. Selection of punishment;

For the crime of murder, life style choice

1. Punishment for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 1, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Inasmuch as punishment has been chosen for life imprisonment with heavy punishment, no other punishment shall be imposed)

1. Confiscation;

Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act

1. Issuing an order to attach an electronic tracking device and matters to be observed;

Article 5(3), 9(1)1, 9-2(1)1, 2-2, 3, and 6 of the Electronic Monitoring, etc. Act

Judgment on Defendant’s argument

1. Summary of the assertion

During the dispute with the victim, the defendant only took three times at the right part of the victim's right part without the intention of murder, and there is no fact that the defendant used the same tool as the knife to knife.

2. Determination

A. Relevant legal principles

1) In a criminal trial, the conviction should be based on evidence of probative value, which can lead a judge to feel true beyond a reasonable doubt, and if there is no evidence to form such a conviction, the defendant’s interest should be determined even if there is suspicion of guilt. However, such conviction should not be necessarily formed by direct evidence, but it can be formed by indirect evidence unless it violates the empirical and logical rules. Even if indirect evidence does not have full probative value as to the crime individually, if it is deemed that there is a comprehensive probative value as a result of comprehensive examination in relation to the whole evidence, if it is deemed that there is no independent evidence. Here, reasonable doubt refers to a reasonable doubt of a fact inconsistent with the logical and empirical rules, rather than all questions and correspondences, and there is no reasonable doubt as to the facts favorable to the defendant, and such doubt should be based on this presumption in relation to the facts established in relation to the defendant, and thus, it cannot be deemed that there is a reasonable doubt or abstract doubt as to the possibility of being found (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2014Do21614.

2) Even in cases of a crime, such as murder, with heavy statutory penalty, the crime of murder, etc., a person may be found guilty only by indirect evidence without direct evidence. Even in cases where the method of murder or the important proviso on the details of the victim’s death is partially destroyed, indirect evidence may be comprehensively examined under mutual relation, and the facts charged of the crime of murder may be acknowledged by comprehensively examining indirect evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Do2658, Sept. 27,

B. Determination

In full view of the following circumstances revealed through the aforementioned evidence, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit, since it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant committed murder with a sacrife or with a saflue article due to the criminal intent of murder.

(i) the blood trace of the victim discovered from the inside and the change of the defendant;

A) At the inside of the residence where the victim was killed, the blood reaction was observed through the string test at the bottom of the visit, ① the upper floor, ② the central floor of the embankment, ③ the bottom of the bed, ④ the bed, ⑤ the bed string string, ⑤ the bed string string at the bed string, ② the blood string in a state where the string 2nd and ③ the blood string in a state where the string of the part overlapping with the string string was wideed to approximately 110cm on the floor, and the string was detected in a state where approximately 110cm away from the string of the above blood string ( ② the blood string of the string and the string, ② the blood string of the Defendant’s body was detected, ④ the blood string of the Defendant’s body was found to have been found to have been found to have been inflicted by the Defendant’s living.

B) All of the facts of each of the crimes of this case from the time of emergency arrest on December 8, 2020

On December 15, 2020, when recognizing the fact that the victim died for the first time during the 5th suspect interrogation process, the police stated to the effect that "the victim was used in the room room part of the victim's right play, and the defendant was able to play in the room room even after drinking alcohol (No. 4th page of the evidence record)." This is the only statement that is consistent with the objective fact of the victim's blood trace discovered in the part of the inner center center floor, and at least the victim was killed due to the Defendant's harmful act, at least the victim was used in the floor due to the Defendant's harmful act.

C) The bloodtain of the posted floor is to remove the blood of the victim of the inner floor of the Defendant.

In light of the fact that a small amount of blood which has not been removed can be seen as the cause of blood transfusions discovered in the inner side of the State, such as copins, etc., and the fact that there is a large amount of blood generated in the inner side of the State, such as copins, can be inferred that there is a large number of blood transfusions that may cause death.

D) Meanwhile, there is no consistency in the defendant's complaint on the grounds that the victim's blood is found in the inside of the room, and it is unreasonable. The defendant did not make any particular statement on the victim's blood during the police investigation stage. On December 21, 2020, when the victim got her head before the second examination stage, he would like to do not her own (No. 5 of the evidence No. 1226 of the record No. 5 of the record No. 5 of the record No. 127 of the record No. 5 of the record). The victim did not have the victim's 's vegetable statement on the victim' (No. 6 of the record No. 127 of the record No. 5 of the record No. 3 of the record No. 4 of the interrogation). The defendant did not have the victim's 's vegetable statement on the victim' and he did not have the victim' again 'the victim'.

(ii)the defendant's appeal against the result of the autopsy of the body and the appearance of harmful acts;

A) An appraisal is found to have a two-way relationship between the right side and the two-way side, the left side and the two-way side, the two-way side and the two-way side, and the two-way side of the eyebrow, which cannot be deemed to have arisen from the above-mentioned side, and the appraisal is determined to have accrued from the price. However, the appraisal alone cannot be deemed to have resulted from the death, and there is no injury that may result in death from the two-way side because the two-way side is not discovered from the victim's body, and there is no injury that may result in death from the victim's death because the two-way side is not found from the victim's body. The damage to the two-way part, such as the above appraisal limit, was excluded from the cause of death of the victim.

B) In order for the victim to be deemed to have been killed due to an over-the-spot or an over-fashion, there must be circumstances to deem that the Defendant committed an attack without prior notice to the victim, at least, in a state of infashing an unexpected attack. However, as delineated below, there is no circumstance to deem that there was an over-fashion or over-fashion of the victim’s head, from among various statements in the situation at the time of pricing the victim’s head head, there is no consistency in the Defendant’s price act.

C) The Defendant, during the fifth examination of suspect in the police room, is imprisoned by the Defendant who is cruel by the Defendant.

해자에게 시끄럽다고 하자 피해자가 화를 내며 달려들어 1회 때렸고, 그러자 피해자가 다시 '죽여라, 죽여라'하고 덤벼들어 주먹으로 2회 때렸다는 취지로 진술하였고(증거기록 제4권 1009쪽), 검찰 제1회 피의자신문 과정에서는 피해자와 싸움을 하던 중 침대에 누워 있던 피해자가 일어나려고 해서 밀친 후 다시 침대에서 일어나려고 하는 피해자를 주먹으로 때렸다는 취지로 진술하였다(증거기록 제5권 1185쪽). 검찰 제2회 피의 자신문 과정에서는 피해자가 피고인에 화를 낼 때 침대 위에 앉아 있었는지, 누워 있었는지 잘 모르겠다고 하다가, 다리를 펴고 앉아 있었던 것 같다고 하면서(증거기록 제5권 1214쪽), 피고인도 침대에 걸터앉은 채로 피해자와 50cm가량 가까운 거리에서 말다툼을 하던 중 피해자의 머리를 정권으로 가격하여 피해자가 '악' 소리를 지르며 오른 쪽으로 넘어졌고, 피해자가 벽 쪽을 보고 누운 상태로 계속 말대꾸를 하여 누워 있는 피해자의 머리를 재차 2회 때리자 피해자가 '억' 소리를 냈다는 취지로 진술하였다(증거기록 제5권 1217~1221쪽). 피고인은 이 법정에서는 자신은 침대 위에 앉아 있었고 피해자는 누워 있었는데 피해자가 말대꾸를 하여 머리를 1회 때리자, 피해자가 아프다고 하면서 얼굴을 찡그리고 있었고, 다시 2회 때릴 때에도 피해자가 누워 있었고 얼굴을 찡그리며 아프다는 반응을 하였다는 취지로 진술하였다(피고인신문 녹취서 10, 11쪽).

D) Even if based on the consistent statements by the Defendant, the Defendant’s secret payment

There is no room for recognizing the possibility that the head has been computed by plucking or plucking the victim in a state in an excessive manner.

E) In full view of these points, there is no room to deem that the Defendant had caused the death of the victim due to the act of making three times the victim’s head head head a drink. Moreover, as seen in the above paragraph (a) above, it is recognized that the Defendant prices several parts of the victim’s head in light of the fact that the victim’s head head was found in addition to the right side side side of the victim’s head head, and the two parts were found in the victim’s head head, and thus, the Defendant made three times the victim’s right side play in the course of committing the crime, not only the Defendant made three times the victim’s head play but also made a non-discriminatory demand for the victim.

3) Damage to the body of the defendant due to the destruction, or abandonment of the defendant

A) The autopsy judged that the event room (not more than 1.5cm in length, less than 0.5cm in depth) between 3-4 clever flever flever flever and flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever flever, which flever flever flever flever flever f

B) However, as can be seen from the point of view that the judgment of damage related to the blood transfusion was limited due to the loss of an annual organization and the fire caused by the autopsy, the reason why the damage was not found to have been caused by the result of the death at the victim’s body despite the autopsy is because the body of the victim was severely damaged or lost due to the destruction, damage, or abandonment of the body of the defendant.

C) Meanwhile, while the Defendant continued to deny the destruction, damage, and abandonment of a corpse, it was found that the investigative agency collected all objective evidence, such as CCTVs and fingers used to transport CCTVs and carcasses, and subsequently committed a crime of destruction, damage, and abandonment of a corpse. However, the investigation agency confirmed the victim’s death up to the time in this court, and there was no timely statement from the investigative agency as to the motive or circumstance leading up to the victim’s death, specific method of crime, etc., and there was only a statement that is not consistent as seen below, as well as a statement that is not acceptable.

D) The Defendant was inside the police station at the time of 12 to 1:00 a.m. during the 5th interrogation process.

방 바닥에 쓰러진 피해자를 흔들어보니 숨을 쉬지 않아서 죽은 것을 확인한 후 외출하여 술을 마셨고, 주거지로 돌아와서도 술을 마시고 취한 상태로 일어나보니 오후 5시경이었으며 화장실에 피해자의 시체가 잘린 상태로 비닐봉지에 싸여 있었다'는 취지로 진술하는가 하면(증거기록 제4권 1010~1012쪽), 술에 취하여 피해자의 사체를 절단했던 기억이 없고, 사체를 절단할 때 사용된 도구도 못 보았으며, 시신을 무엇으로 잘랐는지 기억나지 않는다고도 진술하였다(증거기록 제4권 1030, 1031쪽). 피고인은 경찰 제6회 피의자신문 과정에서도 술에 취해 어떻게 피해자의 사체를 절단했는지 기억이 잘 나지 않는다고 하면서 피해자의 가슴 부위 연부조직을 도려내고 손을 잘랐는지에 대하여 모두 모르겠다는 취지로 답하였다(증거기록 제5권 1097~1099쪽), 피고인은 검찰 제2회 피의자신문 과정에서는 피고인이 피해자의 사망을 확인할 때 피해자가 어디에 있었는지는 기억나지 않고, 하늘을 보고 반듯하게 누워 있었고 다리도 쭉 펴져 있었다고 하면서(증거기록 제5권 1228쪽), 사망 사실을 확인한 후 소주 5병을 마시고 잠깐 실신했다가 침대에서 잠을 깼는데, 시신이 훼손되어 비닐봉지 세 개에 나뉘어 들어 있었고 비닐봉지는 거실에 있는 소파 앞에 있었으며(증거기록 제5권 1229~1230쪽), 정신을 차렸을 때 욕실에는 피가 약간 있었고 욕실에서 손잡이의 재질이 나무인 작은 칼을 발견하였으며 다른 도구는 없었다고 진술하였고, 사체를 절단하는 데 얼마나 시간이 걸렸는지는 전혀 생각이 나지 않는다는 취지로 진술하면서 '일어나니까 저녁때 다되어 있대요'라고 진술하였다(증거기록 제5권 1230~1232쪽). 피고인은 검찰 제3회 피의자신문 과정에서 피해자의 사체를 절단한 도구는 칼밖에 없었고, 사체를 분해한 이유는 술에 취해서 잘 모르겠다는 취지로 진술하였으며(증거기록 제6권 1441쪽), 검찰 제4회 피의자신문 과정에서는 외출했다가 주거지로 돌아와 보니 피해자가 쓰러진 그대로 침대에 누워 있어 흔들어 보았으나 움직이지 않았고, 사망 사실을 확인한 후 코피를 닦았다고 진술하면서, 그 후 술을 더 마시고 잠이 들었다 깨어났을 때 시체가 잘려져 있었다는 취지로 진술하였고(증거기록 제6권 1524쪽), 욕실 세면대 앞의 바닥 배수구 앞에 나무 손잡이 칼이 놓여 있었고, 칼을 발견할 때 욕실 안에 피는 없었던 것 같으며, 칼에 피가 묻어 있는 것은 못 봤다고 진술하면서, 칼 한 자루 외에 다른 도구는 없었다고 진술하였다(증거기록 제6권 1525~1526쪽).

E) An alcoholic beverage to the extent that the Defendant’s dissatiscing body is unsatisfyed in light of the shape of the

It is difficult to view that the act of a person taking advantage of the body is an act of a person. As such, while the defendant made an unreasonable and consistent statement with regard to the destruction and damage of the body, he/she was consistently free from liability for the content related to the method and means of crime even though he/she does not merely refrain from liability, face with the reason that he/she does not memory, the defendant only passively admitted objective evidence as to the crime of abandonment, such as that he/she made a simple statement, and avoided specific statements, such as that the motive for the crime was hot, and the possibility that he/she cut the skin (as evidence No. 3rd of the Record No. 698) and other causes of death, it is possible to find out the body of the defendant's body as one of the means of death, and that it was impossible to find out the body of the victim's body as one of the two different means of death, and that the body of the defendant did not have any direct and several means of death, such as destroying the body of the victim to the extent that he/she did not have any other means of death.

4) Change of the defendant's criminal records

On November 25, 2020, the Defendant, as a means of denying the intention of murder, i.e., taking the victim’s head into consideration, immediately going out of the door and confirmed the death of the victim at a nearby convenience store, and then returned home at the nearby convenience store. However, the Defendant is clearly contrary to the facts acknowledged by objective evidence, such as CCTV in front of his residence and nearby convenience store.

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of legal applicable sentences: life imprisonment;

2. Scope of recommended sentences according to the sentencing criteria;

[Determination of Punishment] homicide [Type 2] Ordinary homicide

[Special Aggravations] Aggravations: Destruction of and damage to the body of a person (excluding simple denial of criminal conduct)

[Recommendation Area and Scope of Recommendations] Special Priority Area, 15 years of imprisonment or more,

[Scope of recommended sentences amended according to applicable sentences] life imprisonment

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment for life;

The Defendant had lived with the victim for 15 years or longer, such as drinking and gambling, and booming with gambling. Nevertheless, the victim appears to have maintained de facto marital relations with the Defendant for a long time without harming the Defendant’s desire to engage in an stuffed life with the victim even though she was aware of his/her surrounding circumstances. The Defendant merely killed the victim on the ground that the victim’s refusal to listen to it, and even if he/she handled it to conceal his/her own crime, it was difficult to find out that the Defendant did not have any pain and fear of murdering the victim’s body because he/she did not know about how much he/she was able to kill the victim’s life and dignity, and that he/she did not have any pain and fear of the victim’s death, even if he/she did not know about how much he/she was able to kill the victim’s body.

However, considering that the crime of murder in this case was not planned in advance, the decision of death penalty shall be avoided, but the death penalty shall be determined by taking into account the fact that the crime of murder in this case is likely to have been committed, and the death was killed from the nearest person, as well as after the death of the person, taking back the tear of the tearer, and determining the punishment like the order.

Judges Cho fixed-term

Judges Park Jin-jin