2013 Highly 658 Murder, homicide, destruction of and damage to a corpse, and concealment of a corpse

A

The current status of movement (prosecution, public trial) and the case of Lee Jong-chul (public trial)

Attorney B (National Ship), C (National Ship)

December 18, 2013

A defendant shall be punished by death.

Two smartphones seized (No. 1), one main body (No. 60), one (No. 61), one external computer (No. 62), one (No. 62), one (No. 62), one (No. 62), one (No. 18 (No. 65), such as a LG observer’s smartphone (No. 63), one (No. 65), one (No. 2L-1 disease (No. 94), one (No. 95), two (No. 100 and 101) on expressway traffic, respectively, shall be confiscated.

Facts of crime

The defendant is a mother and child relationship with the victim D (V, 58 years old), and a person who is in a penal relationship with the victim E (the victim E).

At the time of marriage with F around March 201, 201, at the time of marriage with F, the Defendant provided her mother as security, and used 50 million won as mixed water and automobile purchase for the purpose of mixed water and automobile purchase, etc., with loans equivalent to 50 million won under the name of the Defendant, which were in the name of the Defendant, at the time of marriage with F. The Defendant and F, despite the disposition of the above lending, continued to have the obligation to enter and leave Gangwonland and to pay back the same. Since F, on July 2013, the credit card and loans were extended to Kwikset, and the obligation to pay for the credit card and loans was accumulated due to frequent travel and private life, and the obligation to pay for the above lending was accumulated, the Defendant and F continued to pay for the interest and loans to Kwikset, etc., and the Defendant continued to enter Kwikdo, even if the bad credit holder was on around January 2012, 201.

The defendant and F did not have a good space between the victim D and the marriage early, and the conflicts have gradually increased due to frequent verbal abuse by the victim D, etc. on May 8, 2013, the victim D did not donate the electrical foundation that was demanded by the victim D as a gift on the day of life on May 8, 2013, the relationship with the victim D, such as drinking and painting, has aggravated, and the victim D got a mental and medical treatment due to stress, and the network for the victim D was gradually growing.

Around July 24, 2013, the Defendant found the victim D's house located in the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan City H H 3th floor and requested the victim D to help the victim D by misrepresenting the guarantee and committing fraud, but the victim D rejected the victim D's request to help the victim coldly, and around that time the victim E also rejected the victim's request to help the victim, and the victims did not think of the defendant as his family member, due to cumulative emotions caused by conflict with the victim D's family relationship, the victims killed the victims and conspired with F to receive the victims' property by inheritance.

Since then, the Defendant and F: (a) indicated the specific method of murder (the method of killing a stroke in order to avoid strokeing); (b) the place where the body was abandoned; (c) and the method of leaving a trace of committing the crime (the method of removing the strokes by using the strokes); (d) indicated that the strokes cannot be compared with the scokes; (d) the Defendant purchased the strokes with the scokes; and (e) purchased the strokes and scokes by prescribing three weeks more than ordinary (two weeks) at the mental hospital held around August 6, 2013 in order to use the strokes for committing the crime; and (e) purchased the strokes of the victims and victims to use the strokes on August 9, 2013; and (e) purchased the scokes and scokes on around August 10, 2013.

1. Murder;

At around 10:00 on August 13, 2013, the Defendant found the victim’s house and requested the victim to provide a re-economic assistance. However, the Defendant refused the Defendant’s request, “I am fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly,” and “I am fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly fly,” and the Defendant’s request was rejected, and the victim died of the victim’s frightly fly fly fly fly with the instant wire line prepared at the victim’s back.

As such, the Defendant conspired with F to murder the victim who is a lineal ascendant.

2. homicide;

피고인은 위와 같이 어머니 D을 살해한 후 계속해서 피해자 E도 살해하기로 마음먹고, 2013. 8. 13. 18:00경 피해자에게 전화를 걸어 피해자가 언제 집에 돌아오는지 확인한 후, 준비해간 수면제 4-5봉을 꺼내어 이를 가루로 빻은 후 그날 편의점에서 구입한 맥주에 넣고서 피해자를 기다렸다.

Around 20:00 on August 13, 2013, the Defendant solicited the victim to drink alcohol under the pretext that the victim was to enter his house, and had the victim drink the beer where there was water exemption. The Defendant caused the victim to die with the line, such as Paragraph 1, when the victim lost his consciousness.

As such, the Defendant conspired with F to murder the victim.

3. Destruction, damage, or concealment of a corpse;

On August 14, 2013, at around 02:00, the Defendant prepared D’s body, in advance, in a place like Paragraph 1, at the same time as that of paragraph (1), fixed D’s mother’s body to the front tape of vinyls, D’s clothes located therein, fluences, etc., and then loaded E’s body to the front tape. When it was determined that E’s body transferred to the said vehicle, but it was difficult to move the body due to without delay, the Defendant paid off E’s body, and carried it into the said vehicle.

First of all, the defendant led the body of E to a bath, cut up to the bones of E in the above knife by using a knife and a saw, and laid off the body of E by inserting a knife with a knife with a knife with a knife with a knife with a knife with a knife with a knife with the bones, cut off the knife with eight knife with a knife with a knife with a knife with a knife with a knife with a knife with a knife.

At around 15:00 on August 14, 2013, the Defendant: F, which was contacted by the Defendant on the roads of the f, f, and D and E’s body on a car in which the body of the Defendant was loaded, she started driving the Gyeong-gun, Nam-gu, Incheon, Nam-gu in order to conceal the above body.

At around 22:00 on August 14, 2013, the Defendant and F: (a) stopped the said vehicle at the entrance of the Geum River Gun, which is located in the Seogjin-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do; (b) 3 the body of E stopped from the above vehicle; and (c) so that identification can not be verified after removing the body of E from the above vehicle; and (d) the son with the head and fingerprints of E, with the fingerprints of E, has taken the son with fingerprints and fingerprints, and son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son.

On August 15, 2013, the defendant and F have started from the above time big car, and around 02:00 on August 15, 2013, the defendant and F have stopped the above car and covered D's body using shots so as to make it difficult to detect the body after leaving the body in the off of the car so that it can not confirm the records of dental treatment after leaving the body in the front of the 84-1 Sin Dong-dong, Shin-gun-gun, Gangwon-gun, Gowon-gun, Gowon-gun.

The Defendant, in collusion with F, destroyed the carcasses of E and D, and concealed them respectively.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to I, J, K, L, M, N, andO;

1. A report on the occurrence of missing children, etc. from home, etc., a report on internal investigation (information, interview, investigation, etc.), a request for cooperation in business and response (Evidence No. 10, 13), a request for cooperation in each investigation, and response (Evidence List No. 10, 13), a traffic inquiry meeting, an investigation report (in relation to the crime of the F accused), an investigation report (execution of a search and seizure warrant, evidence list No. 37), an investigation report (in the course of execution of a search and seizure warrant, evidence list No. 37), an investigation report (in the course of confirmation, etc. of entry), an investigation report (in the course of execution of a search and inspection warrant, report on the results thereof, etc.), an investigation report, a report on the purchase of a missing child, etc., a report on the investigation (in the course of criminal investigation), a report on the actual condition of each on-site investigation (Evidence No. 120, 129), a report on de facto investigation (Evidence No. 136), a list), a report on the missing type of Ha;

1. Results of analysis of Defendant mobile phone Kakao messages, etc. and cellular phone analyses;

1. Each protocol of seizure;

1. A written appraisal, a written appraisal in law, a written appraisal in dentistry, and a response to each request for appraisal (Evidence No. 146, 148);

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 250(2) of the Criminal Act (the point of killing a lineal ascendant, the choice of death penalty), Article 250(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of homicide, the choice of life style), Article 161(1) of each Criminal Act (the point of causing death, damage, and concealment of a dead body)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 1, and Article 50 ( Since punishment is imposed as death penalty for the crime of homicide which is the largest punishment, it shall not be imposed any other punishment) of the Criminal Act

1. Confiscation;

Article 48(1)1 of the Criminal Act

Reasons for sentencing

1. Scope of punishment by law: Penalty of death;

2. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria;

(a) Crimes of murdering surviving a judgment;

[Determination of Punishment] homicide, Type 3 (Murder with Unclaimed homicide)

[Special Aggravation] Aggravated Elements: A planned murder crime, damage to a corpse, or a surviving victim.

[Scope of Recommendation] 18 years to 45 years, or longer (special aggravation)

B. Crimes of murder

[Determination of Punishment] homicide, Type 3 (Murder with Unclaimed homicide)

[Special Aggravations] Aggravations: planned murder crimes, damage to the body.

[Scope of Recommendation] 18 years to 45 years, or longer (special aggravation)

(c) Scope of modified recommended sentences: Penalty of death (the minimum of the sentencing criteria shall be set at the lower limit of the sentencing criteria for the crimes for which the sentencing criteria are set, inasmuch as the concurrent crimes falling under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act between each of the above crimes with no sentencing criteria set and each of the crimes with the concealment of dead bodies and damage to dead bodies of which no sentencing criteria are set;

3. Determination of sentencing

A. The facts constituting conditions for sentencing

1) The Defendant’s age, family relation, environment, growth process, occupation and experience, character and conduct, intelligence, level of education, relationship with the victims, etc.

The Defendant, as a Pproduct, was born in Incheon, Q and her father in the second South Korea, and was born in the second South Korea with his father, parents, and the victim E (S). The Defendant was living without economic difficulties. After his father died in around 2008, the Victim D, a mother, was the back of the Defendant’s punishment system.

The Defendant completed the elementary, middle, and high school in Incheon, and entered the department of Tuniversity U, and completed military service on November 2005. After graduating from the university around 2007, the Defendant was discharged from the military service on or around November 2005. From the date of his graduation to the date of the server management company, the Defendant was working as the UN General Kwikset service engineer. At the time of his attending a high school, the Defendant’s curriculum was either good or somewhat poor, and the Defendant’s sexual intercourse was evaluated to have good character and good social relationship and life-based life.

Around December 2005, the Defendant met F (V) who was locked at a church for about five years from around 2006 to around 5 years, and was married on March 26, 2011, and no child was a child. The victim D heard a good question about F in the church, opposed the two people’s teaching system, but subsequently allowed marriage, but the Defendant offered a loan equivalent to KRW 100 million in the market price at the time of marriage. However, even after marriage, the Defendant did not bring about F in mind, which was not good between the Defendant’s husband and wife. Although the Defendant was not particularly bad with the victim E, the Defendant was somewhat drinking due to the fact that the victim E was born for a long time due to his education training.

Although the Defendant did not display his reputation well, there was frequently conflict with the victim D in the course of the teaching system with F, and even after marriage, there was frequent dispute over F. On the other hand, F showed a prior trust and dependence on F. F was given due to depression, eulphism, depression, etc.; F was in a serious degree of dependence on water exemption; the Defendant was also in line with the nephical spirit, and the Defendant was in line with the nephism and was given the exemption from water exemption.

(2) The motive, background, means, and method of committing the crime, and the consequences thereof.

Although Defendant’s monthly pay did not have a strong letter, the number of vehicles owned before and after marriage were 5 times or changed, and F also purchased a large number of bags, cosmetics, oral remarks, etc., which do not fit the circumstances of Defendant’s husband and wife. The Defendant, along with F, neglected Kwikset service (based on Defendant’s prosecutor’s statement) that was going to the country, and raised a large amount of money from July 201 (based on Defendant’s prosecutor’s statement) to Kwikset (based on Defendant’s prosecutor’s statement).

Among these, the economic situation of the defendant was rapidly difficult like the overall criminal facts in the judgment. On July 23, 2013, the defendant and the F sent a message about the method of receiving loans as collateral for the mother's house, and on July 24, 2013, the following day of the same month.

However, despite the false statement that the defendant was damaged by the fraud, the victim's rejection was caused by the victim D, and the conflict between the departments which have been accumulated so far led to the aggravation of the victim D.

From the end of July, 2013 to the beginning of August, 2013, F was unable to kill the Defendant, and thus, the Defendant had the intent to kill the mother, and discussed specifically the method of committing the instant crime and method of abandonment of the body at that time. Accordingly, as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment, the Defendant purchased new technology, wire ropes, blue tape, crys, and so on from August 9, 2013 to August 11, 2013, and purchased new technology, wire ropes, blue tape, crys, etc., and deleted the Kakao Stockholm account.

On August 13, 2013, on the day of the instant case, the Defendant prepared to commit the instant crime on August 13, 2013, prepared for ropes, vinyl, etc., and discovered at the victim D’s house to use the ropes to use the ropes to use the ropes. During that process, the Defendant resisted the victim D, and was under the influence of the Defendant’s entrance. After which, on the following day, the Defendant called F and E on the plan for murder and the place and method of abandonment of the body, etc., the Defendant used the beer to use the beer to use the beer, which was used by the victim E, to kill the victim D, and then murdered the victim E by 10 minutes after the reduction of 10 minutes.

In order to abandon the body of the victims, the defendant laid the body of D up to the new wall time. At first, the defendant laid off D's body to the ridge between the city big car, and the body of E in the judgment that it is difficult to move the body to a toilet until 5:00 on the same day, the body was cut up to 8too, as stated in the criminal facts in the judgment by 5:00 on the same day, and the body was tried to kill the chest part. After that, the F, first of all, the body of E was cut back with F, and then abandoned the body of E, the head and the finger part of the body of the victim, and removed the body of the victim by putting the body on board, with the hick line, and the body was damaged to make it difficult to confirm the identity of the victims by removing the body, such as removing the part of the body by hicking it with the face as in the case of E.

3) The circumstances after the crime, and the attitude of the defendant

After killing the victims, the Defendant left a clock of telephone with some of his cell phoness, left the victims with several calls, and had the same indication that he had been waiting for her mother several times in the calendar of the victim D’s house. The Defendant partially laid down the victims’ body, carried the clothes and shoes of E, and removed the chip of the vehicle’s chip and chip.

After the Defendant abandons the dead bodies of the victims, the Defendant returned back to the scene of the crime, and clean up the toilet floor, etc. using scams, etc. In addition, the Defendant had the gold Bans owned by D, Emeras and New Zealand, and had F dispose of them later.

On August 16, 2013, 2013, three days after homicides with her mother and her mother, the Defendant filed a report of disappearance on August 16, 2013, was investigated as a witness for the police, and the mother no longer fell. The investigation agency first started the investigation by deeming the Defendant as a suspect, but the Defendant was strongly denied the vehicle operation itself as well as the Defendant’s criminal investigation. Rather, the Defendant was suspected of murdering her mother and escape, and the Victim E was identified as an offender.

The police arrested the Defendant on August 22, 2013 and released him due to lack of evidence. After the release, the Defendant tried suicide at F on September 18, 2013 and her home under the prior agreement with F in order to conceal the crime, even after having been released. On the other hand, the victim D’s body was first discovered on September 23, 2013 by F, which caused a change in the mind, and the victim E’s body was found by the Defendant’s statement on September 24, 2013. Even after the victim’s body was discovered, the Defendant was found to have led the mother to murder immediately after the victim’s body was discovered, and the police’s body was abandoned immediately after the victim’s body was found, but the Defendant started to commit all crimes after the victim’s statement and investigation was made at the 8th meeting (the first meeting).

(b) Determination of sentence: Death penalty;

Considering the fact that the death penalty is a very cold punishment that deprives human life of himself/herself of it, it is an extremely exceptional punishment that can be introduced by the dual judicial system in the country of sentence. In light of the degree of responsibility for the crime and the purpose of the punishment, the death penalty should be granted only where there are objective circumstances to recognize it in light of the degree of responsibility for the crime and the purpose of the punishment. Therefore, in imposing the death penalty, the death penalty shall be determined by thoroughly examining all the matters subject to the sentencing conditions including the offender’s age, occupation and experience, character and behavior, intelligence, education degree, growth process, family relation, existence of criminal records, relationship with the victim, motive for the crime, degree of preparation, method and method, degree of the result, the number of victims and the appraisal of damage, the depth and attitude of the crime after the crime, the degree of damage recovery, the possibility of recidivism, etc., and only after clearly explaining the aforementioned special circumstances (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do6493, Jun. 29, 2013).

In this case, it cannot be said that there is no reason to take into account some of the circumstances, such as the fact that the defendant was committed by himself, the age of 29 is relatively a relatively old, the first offender who has no record of crime, the degree of involvement of accomplice F, and the fact that the defendant seems to have been given certain influence from F, the defendant's father and mother, the defendant's wife and the defendant's wife appeal against the defendant.

However, human life is the most dignity value protected by the State and society, and an act of infringing upon it cannot be used for any reason. In this case, the defendant killed her mother with her mother and then destroyed and concealed her body. As such, not only the seriousness of the result, but also the motive, circumstance, method and content of the crime, it cannot be too harsh and anti-humanistic crimes.

The love among family members, in particular, the love and respect for lineal ascendants is a universal ethics of humanity, and the value order that forms the essential constituent part of our social ethics. The Defendant’s instant crime is likely to be subject to the crime of murder at general level in that the crime was committed against lineal ascendants and the blood body, and has an adverse impact on our society. Moreover, the act of destroying the body after the crime, such as cutting military and the body 8 pagos, cutting the body hys, cutting the body hys, cutting the body hys, accompanying the body hys, and carrying the head on, constitutes a cruel crime against the custom and sentiments of our society, and even if it was intended to conceal the crime, the act of destroying the body after the crime itself constitutes a cruel crime against the custom and sentiments of our society, and even if it was the mother and the body of

The Defendant prepared to commit a crime in advance and planned to conceal the dead body in advance. After murdering the victims, the Defendant concealed the tools and traces of the crime close to the complete wall, and made a prompt report of the disappearance to the victims by making it clear by time. After abandoning the dead body of the victims, the Defendant sent back to the scene of the crime and then disposed of the victims with personal belongings, etc., and immediately after committing the crime, it is difficult to find a book of one’s conscience at the end of the crime immediately after the Defendant’s action, such as hiding the victims’ certificate of the right to registration of the building D owned by the victim.

In the course of the investigation, the Defendant, even though he was given a number of opportunities to clarify the crime and to recover the body of the victims at the latest, continued to commit the crime, and instead, he was given a certain position, such as identifying the victim E as an offender, and led to the confession of all the crimes only after the objective evidence was revealed. If the victim D’s body was not discovered by F, it would have been significantly difficult for the Defendant to investigate and punish the Defendant. However, it is doubtful whether the Defendant voluntarily left the place where the death of the victim was voluntarily abandoned and the Defendant was aware of the crime.

In full view of all circumstances, the Defendant asserts that the conflict between the father and the mother of the instant crime is the primary motive for the instant crime. Although the victim D and F was considerably good, it is doubtful whether the victim D cannot be said that the victim D had maliciously and continuously bullying and that the conflict became a scambling without being living together at one house, and that it cannot be said that the victim D did not have any serious problem as a human being, and that the mother cannot be seen to have specifically affixed the Defendant as the mother, such as preparing a loan to the Defendant. In short, it is reasonable to view that the Defendant committed the instant crime to scambling property due to scambling and gambling addiction, etc., and then scambling the property, and then scambling it from the mother who did not have scambling himself, and even if scambling it from the victim, it cannot be considered that the Defendant was extremely scambling to the victim.

In addition, the defendant made a statement that he was killed of the defendant in order to conceal the mother's body, and the criminal act is the same as that of the defendant. In order to kill the defendant in a planned manner by inducing the friendly type that did not have any particular malicious sentiment according to his own needs, the motive of killing the defendant's life is very poor and highly likely to be criticized.

The Defendant and his defense counsel expressed that the Defendant committed a crime by clarifying all facts in the court while leading the Defendant, leading the Defendant to commit the crime, and committing the crime by breaking up or using the Defendant’s completion. However, as recognized by the Defendant himself, it seems clear that the Defendant himself has committed a direct crime in light of the relationship with the victims, etc. Furthermore, it seems clear that the Defendant is guilty of the Defendant’s criminal liability even in the light of the relationship with the victims. Furthermore, even though the Defendant confessions all of the crimes in this court, clearly stated the F’s criminal part, while clearly stating the F’s criminal part, it cannot be doubtful as to whether the Defendant is against the F at the time of the last statement, thereby revealing that the F still remains deep and unfolding about the Defendant’s mistake. It is difficult to doubt whether the Defendant’s mistake is true and against the Defendant’s truth at the time of the last statement. After the confession of the crime, the Defendant’s attitude toward the mother’s death and the punishment due to his own criminal act through this Court cannot be seen.

In this case, it is true that there is no bereaved family member of the victims who want to be punished for severe punishment against the defendant. However, considering the motive, means, methods, results, defendant's act after the crime of this case, attitude at investigation agency and court, adverse effects on our society, etc., it is difficult to deny that the crime of this case of this case is committed in bad faith to the extent that there is no room for the same.

Therefore, considering the fact that the death penalty is an extremely exceptional punishment that can be presented by the dual judicial system of a life-sustaining country as a very cold punishment that deprives human life itself of it, and that there are favorable circumstances for the defendant, the punishment is determined as above in light of the aforementioned factors: (a) balance of various sentencing conditions and punishment for the defendant; (b) balance of crimes; (c) general preventive perspective of crimes; and (d) a number of jurors who represent the sound common sense and experience of the general public; and (b) considering the above factors favorable to the defendant, the punishment is determined as above.

jury verdict and sentencing opinion;

1. A verdict of guilt or innocence;

○ All nine jurors guilty

2. Opinions on sentencing

○ Death penalty: Eight persons;

○ Life : One person;

The presiding judge, the Kim Jong-dong

Judges Kim Gin-hee

Judges Park Jong-young