Moon Da-hye's 'Dangerous Driving Death Award' Considered...When are you going to summon him?

■ Host: Anchor Yoon Bori, Anchor Jung Ji-woong
■ Starring: Attorney Kim Sung-hoon

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN Newswide] when quoting.

[Anchor]
Police are considering whether to add a charge of dangerous driving death to Dahye, the daughter of former President Moon Jae In, who was charged with drunk driving. On the other hand, billions of cash were stolen from a warehouse in downtown Seoul. The source of the huge amount of cash is also questionable. I will point out the related content with lawyer Kim Sung-hoon. Welcome.

Let's start with the first case. Police are now considering whether to charge Dahye, the daughter of former President Moon Jae In, who caused a crash due to drunk driving on the 5th. First of all, what are the charges of dangerous driving manslaughter?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
First of all, the dangerous driving death penalty is a special provision for aggravated punishment. In the case where a person is killed or injured by driving even though it is difficult to drive normally due to drinking or drugs. It can be said that it applies in this case. In general, there are penalties for drunk driving, and apart from drunk driving, there are penalties for fatal injuries under the Special Act on the Handling of Traffic Accidents if a person is injured due to a traffic accident.

What is different from the dangerous driving death penalty here is that it was not just drunk driving that injured a person, but drunk driving was so intoxicated that it was impossible to drive normally. In other words, it applies to the possibility that driving in this state is very dangerous enough to put a person in danger at any time.

[Anchor]
How much does the addition of a dangerous driving manslaughter change the sentence compared to a simple DUI? [Kim Sung Hoon] For example, there is a punishment law for drunk driving. In addition, there is a provision under the Special Act on the Handling of Traffic Accidents as a special provision for professional negligence that is punished when a person injures a person while driving. Usually, injuries are sentenced to up to five years in prison, while basically dangerous driving homicide is much higher than one year to 15 years in prison. That's because the minimum is more than a year. That's why it's aggravated and punished. Therefore, in practice, an accident during a normal drunk driving process does not always result in dangerous driving death. The key issue is whether it has reached a state where normal driving is difficult, as shown over there. [Anchor] So do we just need to look at the additional application of this charge and, in the case of the level of punishment, how hurt is the driver of the affected vehicle?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
To be more precise, we will see that part, but it will be important whether it has reached the level of injury. In principle, it is not applicable if there is no injury itself because it is fatal or injured. However, the more practically important criterion here is whether or not you are intoxicated with a state that is difficult to drive normally. In other words, if you are intoxicated with an ordinary blood alcohol concentration of 0.1% or more, you may be prosecuted for presuming that normal driving is difficult. In practice, the key factor in some precedents is not just blood alcohol concentration, but also before and after movements, walking conditions, or face flushes afterwards, but rather a situation where you can watch or manipulate the front normally.

[Anchor]
If you look at the CCTV footage on the day of the accident, you can see that walking is quite dangerous. You can also see them snooping on another car. So, does this situation of intoxication affect the actual sentencing?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
First of all, it may be important to know which applicable laws are applied as a premise for sentencing. As I said, if you are intoxicated with more than 0.1% and it is difficult to expect normal driving operation to the extent that walking itself is very difficult, the dangerous driving death penalty is applied. If the dangerous driving death penalty is applied, the sentence itself will inevitably increase significantly. Therefore, it can be seen that the degree of alcohol consumption and intoxication affects not only the applicable laws but also the sentencing in the end.

[Anchor]
On that day, Moon Da-hye's activities were additionally coming out one by one, and there were also violations of traffic lights and parking violations. Based on these acts, how much do you expect the punishment to be?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
It may not be conclusive, but at the level of punishment, the degree of intoxication, the degree of damage to the victim, and whether or not to agree with the victim can be important factors. It is said that the victim taxi driver is complaining of pain. If the treatment has been done smoothly and various agreements related to the treatment process are reached smoothly, the sentence may not be high in that case. Since the dangerous driving death penalty itself basically has a high sentence of more than a year in prison, the possibility of a prison sentence cannot be ruled out if the applicable law applies and an agreement is not reached.

[Anchor] It is known that Dahye transferred the names of two vehicles owned by former President Moon
and used them. Is there any legal problem with the transfer of vehicles between families?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
You can just think of it as the same as a family gift. It is not impossible to give between family members, and of course, it can be possible, but the target can be regarded as a vehicle, not cash, but in this case, you have to report the gift because the gift was made. In general, in the case of gifts between children and parents, there are parts that can be deducted within 10 years up to a certain amount. If it exceeds the deduction range, you have to pay gift tax on that part, but if it is within the deduction range, you can report it and there is no gift tax payment.

[Anchor]
But Moon Da-hye is the daughter of the former president, and there is also a controversy with her ex-husband. That's why many people are curious about when you're going to attend the police. The police will not disclose the summons schedule.

[Kim Sung Hoon]
Basically, in principle, most investigations are based on closed-door investigations. It's not more of a default reference point for things like putting people up every time you summon them to a photo line. That's why the police say that. However, due to the structure of Yongsanseo, it will be difficult to make a form that cannot be fully disclosed in terms of the movement, and since the investigation site itself is Yongsanseo, the scene of attendance or summons may be exposed to the media.

[Anchor]
Let's wait and see for this news. Let's move on to the next case. Billions of cash were stolen from a rental warehouse in downtown Seoul. The warehouse manager was the culprit. Please give me your head in this case.

[Kim Sung Hoon]
Rental warehouses, 6.8 billion won, and theft are all strange. Will there be 6.8 billion won in cash in a rental warehouse, not even a safe. And how it was stolen. And because those contents are thefts, it's a very simple story that if you break into a residence at night and steal at night, you'll be punished accordingly. But where did the 6.8 billion won actually come from and why it was stored there? Second, it is not easy for managers to know this unless the goods in the warehouse are exposed to the outside because it is a rental warehouse. The custodian needs to investigate all of these things how he knew he had as much cash in him as I did.

[Anchor]
Another question is that 6.8 billion won was stolen, and the amount seized is only 4 billion won. What happened to this part?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
It can be said that it is not properly revealing where the rest of the stolen and stolen amount was hidden. Or there are cases in which they claim to have wasted money on entertainment expenses. So it is still necessary to check exactly where the amount leaked from the rest of the crime is.

[Anchor]
In the process of stealing money, the criminal showed a lot of willingness in the movie, such as filling paper instead of money. Can these acts also actually affect the sentence?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
In this case, the biggest influence on the sentence is the degree of damage recovery, especially in property crimes. In other words, we need to see how deliberately and deliberately it was done, as well as how hard it was to recover from the damage. If you look at it now, it can be said that the damage recovery was also quite poor if 4 billion out of 6.8 billion was recovered. It is said that he left a very meaningful message like the message now, but as a result, if he deliberately committed this crime and did not make efforts to recover the damage even after he was actually caught, he could be sentenced to heavy punishment.

[Anchor]
A mysterious message came out. Pretend you don't even know who I am to steal cash and leave a message on my way. Then I won't say anything either. I left it like this. From this message alone, the source of cash doesn't seem good. What do you think?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
I have no choice but to think about it in common sense. Why keep it in a rental warehouse when you have 6.8 billion cash? In fact, interest alone is high these days, so there is a lot of interest and you can invest here and there. Or if you give it somewhere, there may be people who usually keep it at home, but the fact that it was stored in a rental warehouse like that, not a safe, is very questionable.

In the end, even if the criminal in this case noticed and stole those parts, he knew that if he reported them and became known to the world, an investigation into the source or illegality of the funds could take place, so it can be said that he wrote such contents suggesting not to report them. I think it is necessary to investigate the accomplice relationship well. If you look over there, you can't tell that there's as much cash in that box unless the warehouse manager opens all of them one by one. I'm curious. How did I know there was cash there? In the end, in this process, the criminal and some of the people who made or kept the funds are sometimes in an accomplice relationship. Otherwise, theft or embezzlement may not be possible unless you know the information, so even that part needs to be investigated.

[Anchor]
Isn't there a difference of more than 2 billion won between the cash reported now and the cash seized? There's a difference of about 2.8 billion won. If we find the 2.8 billion won that has disappeared like this, will the difference in sentence be large?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
Still, there is a big difference in sentence between not recovering the damage at all and doing the entire damage recovery. If not, on the contrary, in this area, I will not recover from the damage and just endure it in a hidden state. In other words, if you just want to buy a sentence, it can be seen that the sentence increases in proportion to it. In the case of property crimes, the difference in sentence is very large depending on the amount of damage. Of course, this case is close to theft, but if it is judged to be embezzlement, it can also be viewed as embezzlement for work. If so, there are parts where each sentence is set differently depending on the case where the amount of damage is more than 500 million won and less than 5 billion won due to the application of the Special Police Act. In that case, when these parts are considered comprehensively, whether the amount of damage is recovered as a whole will be a very important factor in sentencing.

[Anchor]
Another question is, if so, the source of this money was criminal proceeds. If that happens, can it be attributed to the national treasury?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
That's right. If it is said to conceal criminal proceeds, it can also be seen as a separate crime. Confiscation or additional collection may occur here. So, the police are already telling the victim what the source and content of the funds are. Above all, it's hard to understand why they kept 6.8 billion won in cash over there in that way, so a separate investigation is expected to proceed on that part.

[Anchor]
The 6.8 billion theft cases stored in the warehouse, we'll watch the trend again. Finally, the case was sentenced yesterday. A man in his 70s who murdered his ex-wife who was living with him after divorcing
and stabbed an apartment security guard was sentenced to 37 years in prison.
Please also explain this incident.

[Kim Sung-hoon]
I'm an old man. Basically, it's a case where his wife and security guard are acting dishonestly with delusions, misunderstood in this way, and killed them with delusions. Not only did he stab his ex-wife, but he also stabbed the security guard and fled. And within six hours, he was arrested. The fact that he was in his 70s and sentenced to 37 years in prison means that if he fulfills that sentence, he will be sentenced to life imprisonment until he dies, in a way. In that regard, the details of the crime, the brutality of the crime, the degree of damage, and the contents of recovery with the victim in sentencing so far. And the person concerned is said to be the ability to imprison. How much punishment can be carried out. In other words, we also comprehensively consider whether we can serve prison time. In that regard, there are cases where sentencing is reduced in the case of elderly people.
But these two victims, one in particular, died, so if this happened, they basically decided that they needed to be permanently isolated from society, so they sentenced them to 37 years in prison.

[Anchor]
On the same day, a similar sentence was issued in Daegu. A man in his 80s who killed his wife saying, "I ignore her without giving her breakfast," is in his 80s, and he is now sentenced to 20 years in prison. Even in this case, if you are released from prison due to maturity, you will be over 100 years old. Can I say that the court has expressed its will to punish severely?

[Kim Sung Hoon]
Basically, none of those are things that we can't imagine. Murder itself can be seen as an attitude of neglecting human life and an attitude of crime. In particular, in the past, domestic violence, domestic violence, and elderly people were very much reflected in sentencing, but these days, it is the opposite. Rather, even if they are old, they believe that if there is still a risk of recidivism, strict punishment is right. Especially in the case of violence in family relationships, it is considered more serious and harmful, so even in this case, rather than dismissing it as a family problem as in the past, strict punishment is given for the attitude of neglecting human life. You can see this as a judicial attitude right now.

[Anchor]
I see. I'll stop listening to it. I took a look at the news of the accident with lawyer Kim Sung-hoon. Thank you.