The First Trial of the Brothers' Shelter Emergency Appeal Turns into a Sea of Tears... 'Not Guilty Verdict' Held After 31 Years

Victims of the Busan Hyeongjebokjiwon and lawyer Park Jun-young are expressing their stance after attending the first emergency appeal trial regarding the special confinement charges against the late director Park In-geun of Hyeongjebokjiwon, held on the 15th at the Supreme Court in Seocho-dong, Seoul.

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin] The extraordinary appeal trial regarding the special confinement charges against the late Park In-geun, the former director of the Busan Brothers Home, known as the Korean version of ‘Auschwitz,’ was held for the first time in 31 years since the not guilty verdict was issued.

"The 1987 incident was exposed to the public, but unlike the death of an intellectual, the pleas of the (Brothers Home) victims did not receive attention. Are human rights truly equal?"

As Park Jun-young, the representative lawyer for the victims, introduced one by one the unjust stories of the victims, the courtroom turned into a sea of tears.

At 11 a.m. on the 15th, the extraordinary appeal trial regarding the special confinement charges against Park In-geun, director of the Brothers Home, was held at Courtroom No. 1 of the Supreme Court in Seocho-dong, Seoul, presided over by the Second Division of the Supreme Court (Chief Justice Ahn Cheol-sang). About 40 victims also attended the trial that day.

The Brothers Home operated as a facility for vagrants from 1975 to 1987. However, there were widespread allegations that citizens who were not vagrants were illegally confined and subjected to forced labor, beatings, and sexual assault.

First, the prosecution explained the reasons for the extraordinary appeal.

Go Kyung-soon, head of the Public Trial and Litigation Department at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, said, "The Brothers Home was the nation’s largest vagrant detention facility, housing about 38,000 people from 1975. Although most were not vagrants, they were routinely subjected to forced labor and beatings, and at least 571 people died, revealing a tragedy to the world."

He continued, "The prosecution indicted the director of the Brothers Home and others on special confinement charges, but after more than two years and over seven trials, the special confinement charges were acquitted as lawful acts, which drew continuous criticism. It was only in 2018 that the Prosecution’s Past Affairs Committee recommended an apology from the Prosecutor General and the enactment of a special law. Prosecutor General Moon Moo-il personally apologized to the victims in November 2018, leading to the filing of this extraordinary appeal," explaining the background of the appeal.

Go said, "The charges in the extraordinary appeal case are that the defendant conspired to force 168 people into labor until February 1978," and "The extraordinary appeal concerns the first appellate court ruling by the Daegu High Court and the second retrial ruling."

Regarding the reasons for the extraordinary appeal, he stated, "The rulings held that the acts were lawful under Article 20 of the Criminal Act, which excludes illegality, but Article 20 refers to laws that are constitutional and legal. Although there were regulations on the establishment of protective facilities, there was no delegation allowing escape prevention like the Ministry of the Interior’s directive," emphasizing this point.

He added, "The Ministry of the Interior’s directive significantly violates the principle of clarity and also breaches the principles of prohibition of excess and due process. Considering the confinement of victims lawful under this directive is a misinterpretation and misapplication of Article 20 of the Criminal Act," he argued.

Finally, Go said, "Through this extraordinary appeal, it should be clarified that the measures at the time were not based on law, that the defendant’s special confinement was not a lawful act, and that the victims were indeed confined. This is the minimum respect for the surviving victims of the Brothers Home and the minimum means to establish justice in our society. We ask that the acquittal on special confinement be overturned," he concluded.

Park Jun-young, the defense counsel, who spoke on behalf of the defendant, said, "This is a place to discuss legal issues, but in the case of the Brothers Home incident, it is impossible to explain the case without mentioning the victims’ struggles and pain," and asked for understanding as he began to present a prepared PowerPoint (PPT).

He then introduced a petition from Kang Shin-wook, who was confined in the Brothers Home for one year and eight months. The petition expressed grievances that the Brothers Home was forgotten due to the nationwide attention on the Park Jong-chul case in 1987.

Park said, "The heartfelt pleas of the Brothers Home victims did not receive attention, unlike the death of an intellectual. They were erased," and appealed, "The Brothers Home victims ask: Are human rights truly equal?"

Park then cited the inauguration speeches of Supreme Court Justices Kim Sam-hwan, Park Sang-ok, and Noh Jeong-hee, who pledged to "listen to the voices of the socially weak," and said, "Honorable Justices, please empathize with the pain of our society. Ministry of the Interior Directive No. 410 is unconstitutional. It violates the principle of clarity. It clearly violates the physical freedom and freedom of residence of detainees," repeatedly emphasizing the unconstitutionality of the directive.

At the end of his statement, Park said, "Finally, I will conclude by quoting the article ‘Brothers Home, That’s My Whole Life’ by human rights activist Yoo Hye-jung, which reflects on and awakens the social significance of the Brothers Home incident," and then read the article.

Park said, "It is impossible to turn back time and rewrite the past. But speaking about what happened in the past in the present not only determines how we use time but probably also influences future actions. Based on this, although the truth-finding and apology for the Brothers Home in 1987 were frustrated, how we remember, investigate, and comfort the surviving victims of the Brothers Home in 2020 can create new memories and a future community. Pain can be alleviated and healed. This is the minimum respect for the victims who have lived in pain all their lives and a social repentance for those who died unjustly. It is also a journey to reaffirm that human dignity is the most important value. Even if we stagger, I hope we can walk together, and that they may be a little more peaceful tomorrow than today. Watching the heavy snow falling, I prayed so," concluding his statement while reading the article.

The court said, "This case involves widespread harm and social and historical pain, so our Supreme Court is also handling it carefully," explaining the extraordinary appeal system.

Even if past rulings are overturned through the extraordinary appeal procedure, no further punishment can be imposed on the deceased Director Park. In other words, it does not affect Park’s not guilty verdict.

Unlike retrials, it only corrects legal errors in existing rulings and cannot overturn favorable rulings for the defendant to unfavorable ones.

However, through the extraordinary appeal, the judiciary can acknowledge past mistakes, which may help victims in lawsuits for damages against the state.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.