'Lee Seok-jun, Kwon Jae-chan, Kim Byung-chan' Three New Disclosures in One Month... Record High This Year

Kim Byung-chan, Kwon Jae-chan, and now Lee Seok-jun: 3 New Identity Disclosures in One Month
Evidence of Increasing Heinous Crimes... Reflecting Trend of Active Identity Disclosure Decisions
"Calls to Reconsider Identity Disclosure Criteria and Crime Prevention Effectiveness"

[Asia Economy Reporter Song Seung-yoon] The identity of Lee Seok-jun (26, photo), who visited the house of a woman he had previously dated and murdered her family, has been disclosed. With this, the number of suspects whose identities have been revealed for serious crimes committed this year has increased to 10, including Lee Seok-jun. This is the highest annual number since the suspect identity disclosure system was implemented in 2010.

The Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency announced on the 14th that the Identity Disclosure Deliberation Committee decided to disclose Lee Seok-jun’s identity, considering △ the serious damage caused, including preparing a weapon in advance, killing one person at the victim’s residence, and leaving another in critical condition △ his confession to the crime △ sufficient evidence secured through on-site investigation and closed-circuit television (CCTV) footage △ the preventive effect on similar crimes and concerns about secondary damage.

Previously, the identities and faces of suspects such as Kim Byung-chan, who killed a woman under protective custody; Kwon Jae-chan, who killed an acquaintance and an accomplice; Kang Yoon-sung, who damaged an electronic anklet and committed serial murders; Choi Chan-wook, who sexually assaulted minors and produced and distributed sexual exploitation materials; Kim Young-jun, who distributed nude videos of over 1,300 people; Heo Min-woo, who killed a karaoke bar owner in Incheon; and Kim Tae-hyun, who killed three women in a family, were disclosed. The identities of Lee Seok-jun, Kim Byung-chan, and Kwon Jae-chan were revealed within a month. Since the operation guidelines for the deliberation committee were established in 2015, a total of 34 suspects have had their identities disclosed. Last year, eight suspects had their identities revealed, half of whom were related to the ‘Nth Room case.’

According to the current Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Specific Violent Crimes, identity disclosure is decided through the deliberation committee when it is judged that the suspect of a specific violent crime, involving cruel means or causing serious damage, has been sufficiently proven. It also considers whether the disclosure aligns with the public interest, such as guaranteeing the public’s right to know and preventing recidivism and crime. Juveniles are not subject to identity disclosure. The increasing number of identity disclosures indicates the prevalence of heinous crimes, but recently, cases attracting significant public attention tend to have their identities disclosed without much difficulty. This has raised concerns about unclear standards for identity disclosure. The decision often depends heavily on the social atmosphere at the time of the incident. The identity disclosure committee includes not only police officers but also doctors, legal professionals, educators, and journalists, but there are no specific qualifications stipulated for committee members.

Police logo. Photo by Asia Economy DB

There are also criticisms that the current identity disclosure system has limited social benefits such as crime prevention, while posing risks of human rights violations against innocent bystanders. In March this year, the Constitutional Court’s Constitutional Research Institute released a report titled ‘A Constitutional Study on the Suspect Identity Disclosure System,’ stating, "What exactly does our society aim to gain or actually gain by disclosing identities while violating the constitutional presumption of innocence?" and urged, "We must reconsider whether the suspect identity disclosure system is constitutionally acceptable and re-recognize the risks it entails across society."

Meanwhile, the National Police Commission recently deliberated and approved a partial amendment guideline on ‘Suspect Identity Disclosure Guidelines’ at a plenary meeting. The amendment includes measures to protect suspects’ human rights, such as notifying suspects and their lawyers of the committee meeting and hearing their opinions. It also establishes procedures to guarantee suspects’ right to defense, such as notifying the decision in writing once identity disclosure is decided. The amendment explicitly states the disclosure of suspects’ ID photos. It also includes provisions to unify identity disclosure decisions as much as possible across city and provincial police agencies nationwide and designates the National Police Agency’s National Investigation Headquarters (Guksubon) as the control tower.

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