Defendant 1 and three others

Edathers

Attorney Lee Sung-sung et al.

Defendant 1 shall be punished by imprisonment for life, imprisonment for twelve years with prison labor, imprisonment for six years with prison labor, and imprisonment for four years, respectively.

The number of days of detention prior to the issuance of this judgment shall be 106 days each of the above punishment against Defendant 2, 3, and 4.

However, with respect to Defendant 4, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Seized Seocho Ppuri 756g (Seoul Southern District Prosecutors' Office No. 2729 of 2006) shall be forfeited from Defendant 2.

1. Around November 2005, Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 knew that Defendant 1 was aware of the fact that Defendant 2’s “(name omitted) tree cancer” located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (number omitted) operated by Defendant 2, and Defendant 2 was pro-friendly to the extent that Defendant 1 loaned money without any distance to Defendant 1. As Defendant 1 was working as an insurance solicitor, Defendant 1 was an insured person of the victim non-indicted 1 (Nam, 59 years old) who is the husband, and the victim was already the husband, and the victim was dead, Defendant 1 could become the beneficiary and receive large amount of insurance money. In collusion, Defendant 2 conspired with the intent to murder the victim to receive the insurance money and lead the victim to a disguised death due to a disaster or a disease;

At around 20:00 on the first day of Apr. 2006, at around 20:20, the victim's residence located in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Silungdong (number omitted), Defendant 1, who was dried away from Defendant 2, to the effect that "the victim 1, who dried water containing "the bones fright," which can cause human death, she shall drink the victim." At around 20:00 the next day, Defendant 1, who again dried water from Defendant 2, "the bones flurg" month, which was re-dried from Defendant 2, was dilution into the above drug, was dilution with the above drug at around 50, the victim flurgy, and again, when drinking water from Defendant 2 at least a certain amount, had the victim flurged, who was able to die, and had the victim flurged with the remaining water of Defendant 1, who was flurged with the remaining water of this case.

2. Defendant 1, 2, and 4 were killed by the victim due to drugs as above, together with Nonindicted 2:

At around 14:00, on April 26, 2006, at around 14:00, Defendant 1 revised the plan to kill the victim by means of a “debrising” after consultation with Defendant 2. Defendant 2: (a) called Nonindicted 2’s internal female, asked Nonindicted 2 to kill the victim; and (b) around that time, Defendant 4 delivered the purport to Nonindicted 2 by asking Nonindicted 2 to murder the victim; (c) Defendant 2 consented to the above proposal, and was provided with information on the victim, such as the victim’s identification photograph, by Defendant 1 and 2; and (d) Nonindicted 2 conspired with Defendant 2 and 4 through Defendant 2 and Defendant 2 to commit the crime of murdering KRW 70,000,000,000 for the purpose of murdering the victim; and (e) Defendant 2 conspired with Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 by receiving KRW 75,000 from May 1, 206 to June 26, 2006.

3. Defendant 1, 2, and 3 have continued to demand the payment of money by Non-Indicted 2, but did not properly executed by the above suicide, in sequence, in collusion with the latter;

2006. 8. 6. 17:00경 위 피해자의 주거지 안방에서, 피해자가 술을 마시고 취기가 있는 틈을 이용하여 피고인 1은 그동안 차곡차곡 모아두었던 수면안정진정제 아론 70여 정을 불상의 방법으로 피해자로 하여금 먹게 하고, 이에 피해자가 오줌까지 싸며 곯아떨어지자 피고인 1은 그 상황을 피고인 2에게 전화로 알려 “곧 죽는다”는 취지의 피고인 2의 말에 힘을 얻은 후 좀 더 빨리 피해자를 사망에 이르게 하기 위하여 범행계획을 이미 눈치채고 있던 피고인 3을 전화로 불러 함께 피해자의 목을 조르자고 제의하였으나 피고인 3이 겁을 먹고 그냥 가버려 다음날인 2006. 8. 7. 새벽까지 피해자의 사망을 기다렸으나 피해자가 사망하지 않고 코를 골면서 자고 있자 그 상황을 피고인 2에게 전화로 알리고, 이를 전해들은 피고인 2는 “넥타이로 목을 졸라 죽여라. 넥타이로 목을 조르면 흔적이 남지 않는다. 혼자 못하면 피고인 3을 불러 함께 해라”는 취지로 피고인 1에게 조언하고, 피고인 1은 2006. 8. 7. 08:30경 피고인 3의 집을 찾아가 돈이라면 사족을 못 쓰는 피고인 3에게 “같이 가서 도와주지 않으면 전에 빌린 돈 2,700만 원은 못 준다”라고 하면서 피고인 3을 설득하여 함께 피해자가 잠들어 있는 피해자의 주거지 안방에 이르러, 같은 날 09:00경 피고인 1은 그곳 장롱에서 넥타이를 꺼내 엎드린 채 잠들어 있는 피해자의 목에 건 다음 피고인 3과 함께 양쪽에서 피해자의 등을 밟고 넥타이를 잡아당기는 방법으로 피해자의 목을 졸라 그 무렵 피해자를 경부 압박에 의한 질식으로 사망하게 하여 피해자를 살해하였다.

1. The respective legal statements of the defendant 1, 2, and 3 in part;

1. Defendant 4’s legal statement

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. The prosecutor’s statement concerning Nonindicted 3

1. Each police protocol on Nonindicted 4, 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8

1. Seizure records;

1. A written request for appraisal;

1. A corpse inspection report, death inspection report, autopsy report, and inquiry report requesting appraisal;

1. On-site and photographs of carcasses;

1. Results of each insurance contract, inquiry, and investigation report;

1. Answers on the details of each currency and requests for cooperation in investigation;

1. Mebato;

1. Each investigation report (the hearing of Nonindicted 6’s statement for the sale of Seocho Ppuri, the investigation of Nonindicted 9’s Dong-saves, the search, investigation, etc. into the pharmacy saves, the murder compensation paid, the primary ppuri ingredients, etc.)

1. The abstract of the lawsuit;

A. Defendant 1’s assertion

In the process of committing the crime under paragraph (3) of the crime, it was not possible to let the victim drink 70 years from the WIGs petition system.

B. Defendant 2’s assertion

In the judgment, he did not participate in or conspired to commit the crime under paragraph (3).

C. Defendant 3’s assertion

The victim knew that the victim was trying to commit suicide and did not have the intent to kill the victim. Before the defendant scambling the victim's timber, the victim was already dead.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on Defendant 1’s assertion

On August 6, 2006, the court below stated that the defendant 3 had the prosecutor's office obtain 17:0 to 18:00 telephone from August 6, 2006 the proposal that the defendant 1 "I wish to harm all the children prior to the clerical error," and that the defendant 1 stated that "I will die within the Republic of Korea" (862 pages of investigation record) the defendant 2 stated that "I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know about the above facts of the crime, I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know about the above facts of the crime, I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to use it at the time of the crime, I would not know that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know that I would like to know. I would like to know that I would like to know.

B. Judgment on Defendant 2’s assertion

On August 6, 2006, Defendant 1 and Defendant 2 consistently called Defendant 2 by phone call from the prosecutor's office and this court. Defendant 2 told Defendant 2 to the effect that “I am sing down the number of tax exemptions”. Defendant 2 did not die at 8:0 a.m. on the following day, Defendant 2 conspired with Defendant 2 with Defendant 2 on 8:0 a.m. 8m. : 6m. 8m. 8m. : 8m. 6m. : 8m. 4m. : 8m. 8m. : 8m. 6m. : 8m. 4m. : 8m. 6m. 8m. 8m. : 1m. 6m. 8m. 4. 8m. 8m. 8, Defendant 2 and Defendant 3m. 6m. 8m. m. 8m. 3m.

C. Judgment on Defendant 3’s assertion

살피건대, 판시 각 증거 및 이에 의하여 인정되는 다음과 같은 사정, 즉 피고인 3은 경찰에서 2006. 8. 6. 저녁 상피고인 1로부터 전화를 받고 피해자의 집으로 가자 피해자가 오줌을 싸 놓은 채 잠을 자고 있었고, 상피고인 1이 피고인에게 “아들 없을 때 빨리 해야한다, 피해자가 안 죽고 깨어나면 자신이 죽는다”는 취지로 말하면서 피해자를 함께 죽이자고 제의하였으나 거절하고 피고인의 집으로 돌아왔고, 그 다음날 아침 상피고인 1이 피고인의 집으로 와서 “피해자가 죽지 않으면 피고인의 돈을 주지 못준다”는 취지로 말하여 상피고인 1의 집으로 가 넥타이를 피해자의 목에 감고 양쪽에서 피해자의 등을 발로 밟고 넥타이를 잡아당기자 피해자가 “켁켁”하는 듯한 소리를 내더니 조용해졌다는 취지로 진술한 점(수사기록 521~526쪽), 상피고인 1도 경찰에서 당시 잠을 자고 있던 피해자의 목을 넥타이로 건 다음 피고인 3과 함께 양쪽에서 피해자의 등을 밟고 넥타이를 잡아당기자 피해자가 “켁, 켁” 두 번을 하더니 피를 조금 흘리고 죽었다고 진술한 점(수사기록 609~611쪽), 피해자의 아들인 공소외 3은 검찰에서 2006. 8. 7. 08:00경 자신이 출근할 때까지 피해자가 안방에서 코를 골며 자고 있었다고 진술한 점(수사기록 915쪽) 등을 종합해 보면, 피고인 3은 상피고인 1이 피해자를 살해하려고 한다는 정을 알면서도 상피고인 1과 함께 잠을 자고 있던 피해자의 목을 넥타이로 졸라 피해자를 살해한 사실을 넉넉히 인정할 수 있으므로, 위 주장도 받아들이지 아니한다.

Defendant 1 and 3 alleged to the effect that the above Defendants were not in the mental state at the time of committing the crime under paragraph (3) of the crime, or that they were in the mental state or the state of mental disorder due to mental illness, etc., in light of the contents and attitude of the above Defendants in the investigative agency and this court, the background leading up to the crime, the means and method of the crime, and the above Defendants’ actions before and after the crime, etc., they cannot be deemed to have existed at the time of the crime. Accordingly, each of the above arguments is rejected.

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

Defendant 1: Articles 254, 250(1), 30(2), 250(1), 30(2) of the Criminal Act, Articles 255, 250(1)(2) of the Criminal Act, Articles 250(1), 250(1), and 30(2) of the Criminal Act

Defendant 2: Articles 254, 250(1), 30(2), 250(1), 30(2) of the Criminal Act, Articles 255 and 250(1)(2) of the Criminal Act, Articles 250(1), 250(1), and 30(2) of the Criminal Act

Defendant 3: Articles 250(1) and 30(1) of the Criminal Act

Defendant 4: Articles 255 and 250(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation of concurrent crimes;

Defendant 1: The former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)1, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act. Article 50 (As a result of selecting a punishment for life for murder with the largest punishment, no other punishment shall be imposed.)

Defendant 2: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with Punishment for homicide which is the most severe Crimes)

1. Calculation of the number of days pending trial (the defendant 2, 3, 4);

Article 57 of the Criminal Code

1. Suspension of execution (Defendant 4);

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Confiscation (Defendant 2);

Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act

1. As to Defendant 1

In order to receive insurance proceeds of life insurance, each of the crimes of this case committed with the defendant's husband in collusion with the defendant 2 on several occasions, he attempted to kill the victim with drugs, and conspired with the defendant 4 for the purpose of murdering the victim by so-called "Cheongbuin". Furthermore, the victim's name who was locked in collusion with the defendant 2 and 3 on the part of Kexna, is serious human life, and above all, the crimes that were revealed in the background leading up to the crime, the means and method of the crime, the result of the crime, the relation between the defendant and the victim, etc., are extremely serious, and the academic background and circumstance of the crime are extremely serious, the defendant planned to kill the victim in advance and tried to kill the victim through several ways, and eventually moved to the first and continuously display the order of murder by murdering the victim on the part of Kexna, and the defendant did not have any responsibility to kill the victim's body after the death of the victim in this case, and even after the death of the victim in this case, it appears that the victim's body was not guilty.

2. As to the defendant 2 and 3

The crime of this case is committed by Defendant 2 in collusion with the above defendants 1 and attempted to kill the victim several times, and the victim conspired with the above defendants 4 for the purpose of killing the victim by the so-called "Cheongbuin". Furthermore, the above defendants' scam in collusion with the above defendants 1 et al. are serious human life, and above all, the crimes are committed in the course of committing the crime, the means and methods of the crime, the result of the crime, etc., the nature and circumstances of the crime are very serious, and the victim's bereaved family members did not reach an agreement with the above defendants. In addition, the above defendants were first offenders who did not have any criminal record or did not have any record of the crime, and the defendant 2 appears to have played a considerable role, such as participating in the crime of the above defendants 1 from the beginning, and the defendant 3 refused to commit the crime and had the victim take into account the defendant 1's inducement and acquisition, but led the above defendants to participate in the crime, his age and character, and all other criminal records are contrary to the above defendants' age records.

3. As to Defendant 4

The crime of this case was committed by the defendant 2 at the request of the above defendant to kill the victim and conspired with the above defendant 1, gambling accommodation for the purpose of killing the victim by receiving money under the pretext of starting money, etc. In addition to the circumstances leading to the crime, the nature of the crime as well as the method and method of the crime, etc., other than the crime committed by the defendant, the defendant did not have any specific criminal power, other than the punishment of a fine once by violence, deposited 10 million won for the victim's bereaved family members, and the defendant made a deposit in depth of his mistake, and all other circumstances shown in the records, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, academic background, career, home environment, etc., are considered.

Judges Lee Tae-su (Presiding Judge) Kim Han-young