Residence

Reference domicile

Attorney Kim Jung-sik

Seized knife knife (No. 1) shall be confiscated.

The defendant lives in Gwangjin-gu in Seoul, and is a neighbor with the victim B (the age of 87) and the victim C (the age of 78).

On July 2017, the Defendant newly constructed a multi-family house with five floors at the above domicile. The victims' children filed a civil petition on the unauthorized expansion of the multi-family house and the unauthorized alteration of the use of the multi-family house on several occasions, and there is conflict with the victims.

1. Intimidation;

On October 4, 2018: around 00 to 23: 00, the Defendant sent the gate to the victims in the house, who were the residence of the said victims, and the victims in the house in the above 00-mentioned 19:0, “I wish to see all the scars, but I want to see, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am, I am am, I am am at the back of the internal investigation, and I am at the end of the internal investigation.

Accordingly, the defendant threatened victims.

2. homicide;

On February 5, 2019, the defendant tried to interview the children of the victims who visited the victims' house on the A.M. and to communicate related to the filing of civil petitions. However, they did not talk with the defendant, but did not have any answer by dividing the first races of the victims. The defendant sent a knife knife to the defendant's house, and had a knife knife that knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife knife

From around 58 February 12, 2019 to 14:33 of the same day, the Defendant entered the victim's house, shouldered the entrance door door, opened a locker, and entered the locker, and then deducted the victim B who is in the small room from the knife "h kn's knife and knife before the knife and knife the knife and knife of the victim's face and knife from the knife to the knife, and caused the victim's death by cutting off the knife from the knife to the knife to escape out of the knife.

Accordingly, the defendant murdered victims.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the accused;

1. Each written statement of D and E;

1. A written autopsy report, a death diagnosis report, each written result of autopsy, and each written result of autopsy;

1. The investigation report (related to the on-site CCTV investigation on the day of the instant case), the investigation report (related to autopsy), the investigation report (related to the blood scams, scams, gene emotions), the investigation report (in the form of the first victims at the site of the instant case), the investigation report (related to the record of receipt of the report 112), the investigation report (related to the phone investigation by the witness E), and the investigation report (Attachment to the 112 Report List);

1. Each protocol of seizure;

1. Application of statutes governing reports on results of field identification;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 250(1) of each Criminal Code (the point of murder) and Article 283(1) of each Criminal Code (the point of intimidation)

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (Concurrent Crimes of Intimidation, and Punishment for Crimes of Intimidation against Victims Do○○ with more severe criminal penalty)

1. Selection of punishment;

In regard to each murder crime, choice of imprisonment for life or intimidation shall be made.

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 and imprisonment for life have been chosen for the crime of murder to ○○○○○, which is the largest victim’s severe punishment, no other punishment shall be imposed)

1. Confiscation;

1. Scope of applicable sentences by law: life imprisonment;

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

(a) One crime (homicide);

[Determination of Type 5] homicide (Type 5): Impact of homicide when extreme life is serious (special spacters): Victims who are vulnerable to the crime, cruel method of committing the crime.

【Recommendation and Scope of Recommendations】 Special Priority Area, Life imprisonment or More

(b) Two crimes of homicide)

[Determination of Type 5] homicide (Type 5): Impact of homicide when extreme life is serious (special spacters): Victims who are vulnerable to the crime, cruel method of committing the crime.

[Recommendation and Scope of Recommendations] Special Aggravation and Sentencing. The scope of recommendations according to the standards for the management of multiple crimes: Each crime of intimidation above the standards for the management of multiple crimes is in a commercial concurrence relationship, and the sentencing guidelines are not applied to ordinary concurrent crimes. Since each crime of murder against which the sentencing guidelines are set and the remaining crimes to which the sentencing guidelines are not applied are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, the lower limit of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines shall be considered only.]

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment for life;

With respect to the illegal expansion of a multi-family house owned by the Defendant, the Defendant threatened the neighboring victims with one another on October 4, 2018, and threatened the victims with their families before the victims’ residence. On February 5, 2019, the Defendant invaded the victims’ residence on the day of the snow saving, thereby murdering the elderly victims at a knife, and eventually transferred to the execution of the above intimidation. It is necessary to punish the victims with severe punishment corresponding to the Defendant’s crime.

The life of a person is an absolute value that cannot be altered and criminal law, and the highest legal interest that our legal system intends to protect. The Defendant’s act of hiding the victim’s timber cannot be justified for any reason. Although the Defendant asserted that the victims and their children had filed a civil petition related to construction, it is not acceptable to agree that the victims were cruel for the said reason. The Defendant did not appear to have committed a crime against the victims and their bereaved family members, and did not appear to have made a serious effort to commit a crime and receive a letter. (Although it was recognized that the Defendant recovered from the illegal extension of multi-household housing after the instant crime, it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s act was a direct crime against the bereaved family members because it was merely an act of performing the duty of restoration already assumed by the Defendant following the illegal extension.)

Considering the suspicion and seriousness of the crime committed by the Defendant, the degree of responsibility corresponding thereto, and other various sentencing conditions, including the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, intelligence and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, it is reasonable to comprehensively consider the strike that the instant case affects our society and the necessity for general prevention, etc., it is reasonable to allow the Defendant to participate in a life-long misconduct in the state of isolation from society without setting a period in the future and live in the mind of committing the crime against the victims and their bereaved family members. In light of these circumstances, the punishment as ordered shall be determined as per Disposition.

Maximum report;

Judges Mung-chan