"The crime of a father and daughter who have had an inappropriate relationship" retrial case in 15 years [Y Record]

■ Host: Anchor Na Kyung-chul and Anchor Lee Se-na
■ 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 New Square 2PM] when quoting.

◇ Anchor> It's been a while. It happened 15 years ago in a village in Suncheon, and the father and daughter, who were named as the culprits of the so-called cyanide makgeolli murder case, will be retried? What kind of incident was it?

◆Kim Sung-hoon> It was a very popular incident at the time. As mentioned earlier, there was a toxic substance such as cyanide in makgeolli, and two residents who shared it died. In the end, the investigation into who planned this and who did this has been narrowed down, but as shown on the broadcast, two people, who are father and daughter, conspired as accomplices and called them father and daughter, so there is one of the victims. The results of the investigation at the time were announced that the victim conspired to kill his wife and mother and injected poison into one person, and eventually committed the murder crime in such a way. Accordingly, there were prosecutions of the two and murder charges, and finally, it can be said that the Supreme Court made a final decision.

◇Anchor> As you said, he was acquitted in the first trial, but he was convicted in the second trial, and the Supreme Court convicted him, but nevertheless, constant suspicions continued to be raised about this suspicion.

◆Kim Sung-hoon> That's right. At that time, the prosecution announced the contents earlier, but the contents themselves were very bizarre and shocking, so there were many controversies, but there were questions about whether there was proper assistance from a lawyer or proper investigation in the process. And in conclusion, I have been continuously appealing to the point that a retrial needs to be conducted on this part. He is famous as a lawyer specializing in retrial, lawyer Park Joon-young represented a request for retrial and the decision was made in January this year. In a way, the very unusual part is that the decision of the Gwangju High Court is very unusual in relation to the decision to retrial. Simply, it is not a very exceptional retrial because there is something that needs to be argued again, but it contains a very strong criticism of the prosecution's investigation and abuse of investigative power at the time. Considering the contradiction between newly discovered evidence and statements that the prosecutor abused his investigative power to commit very serious human rights violations, i.e., by injecting thoughts and conducting a guided interrogation, the prosecutor abused his investigative power to the extent that the judgment could not be maintained beyond the level of suspicion. In fact, it can be said that the overall prosecution and investigation process in this process showed the judgment of the court that it was almost a crime.

◇Anchor> This is the retrial lawyer you just mentioned, and lawyer Park Joon-young had an interview with our YTN. I'll listen to it for a bit.

[Park Joon-young / Retrial Lawyer (YTN Newsrider in July last year): There were quite a lot of evidence of innocence that the prosecutor did not submit at the time. Among them, the evidence of innocence we pay attention to is hundreds of pages. If it had been submitted, it would have been innocent at the time, in this case. This investigation has mobilized all the wrong investigative techniques. coercion, conciliation, deception I don't know what words are appropriate to describe it in. It's so sneaky and mean.

◇Anchor> Lawyer Park Joon-young, who criticized in a very strong tone, had hundreds of pages of evidence of innocence. I think this evidence played a decisive role in the decision of the retrial.

◆Kim Sung-hoon> We usually say it's a three-trial system. In order to retrial the final judgment by the Supreme Court, a retrial is decided only when there is a problem in the investigation process at the time or there is decisive evidence to change the conclusion of innocence with new evidence. In fact, even if you request a retrial, it is very rare to decide on a retrial. Nevertheless, given that the Gwangju High Court's decision was very confident, in a way, a retrial was made that pointed out that the previous investigation and prosecution process were very wrong, in a way, the newly discovered evidence at the time and the evidence of innocence were not simply found by accident at the current scientific level, but were sufficiently confirmed in the investigation process at the time, and even what had to be secured was not submitted or utilized with arbitrary intent, which is a strong argument from the retrial claimant.

◇Anchor> Now the father and daughter are serving 20 years in prison and life imprisonment, respectively, but will this trial be held while serving time?

◆Kim Sung-hoon> Unless you come out on bail for a while now, and usually, the period in which bail can be cited may vary depending on the period of time served. Depending on the progress of the reconsideration, some bail may be made, but in the case of life imprisonment, bail may be difficult because it has not been 20 years. First of all, it seems that the trial itself can proceed as it is. However, if you look at the contents now, it is also important to determine whether this case is guilty or innocent, but if the person is innocent, the period of human rights violations is very long, so it is necessary to quickly and quickly save rights in this regard.

◇Anchor> So what are the key issues in this trial process?

◆Kim Sung-hoon> It is an old case related to this case, but in terms of related content, it was the person's confession that became the most important element of guilt. However, the strongest argument of the retrial claimant is that the process of confession is contaminated. In other words, there were coercion, conciliation, or pressure, and especially in the case of your daughter, there were not enough parts to normally discriminate or express their intentions in this area, but it would also be an important factor to force them to admit that A told each other and B by saying false things as if they were using a prisoner's dilemma. If there's one limitation of existing evidence, the second objective evidence that goes against it, and the ones that it's excluded from, will be very important. For example, one of the few things on the report now is that the makgeolli that corresponds to that time was rarely sold on the site, so you can only buy it if you go out to downtown Suncheon, but the details of how you can buy and do those parts have not been properly investigated and have never been in reality. Second, some of the villagers' statements that they had purchased cyanide and seen it used cyanide were confirmed to be wrong, but they also did not go in. In other words, if there was enough evidence to see whether it was innocent or guilty in the course of the investigation and there was a reasonable suspicion that it was not guilty, and if the contents of the fact that it was very artificially excluded, there is a high possibility of acquittal in this case.

◇Anchor> So this is the part that should be revealed whether inappropriate methods were used during the investigation and whether there is an ignorance of human rights. How long will it take for the future trial process, what process, and the final conclusion?

◆Kim Sung-hoon> It's very unfortunate that it's a retrial, so it takes years for a decision to be made and a ruling is made. In that regard, if this is unfair imprisonment, I'm sorry, but the reason I use the expression "what if" is that retrial is actually a process of trial, so I'm not arbitrarily trying to conclude one conclusion. If that happens, the damage caused by this is so great that it needs to be concluded as soon as possible. However, for this part, the investigative agency of the public state could abuse its power to turn innocent people into criminals. In fact, it appears in the movie's lines, but the scariest and most dangerous villain in the world is called a villain wearing a badge. What this is is that being able to control the state's public power on your back is just as dangerous when you have so-called malice. In this regard, I think it will take a long time if the prosecution investigates these processes and does not reveal themselves. The reasons why investigators did not submit any data at the time, what happened to those reasons, and the professional investigations and contents of those areas and investigations into them are expected to be fiercely contested in court.

◇ Anchor> If this father and daughter are living a really unfair prison life, they should be corrected as soon as possible, but we will have to wait and see the retrial process.



Excerpted from
: Lee Mi-young, editor of the digital news team

#YRecord