Daegum Selected as Outstanding Case for Trial of 'Jeong-in Abuse Death Case' Sentenced to 35 Years Imprisonment

Deputy Chief Prosecutor Gong Bong-suk (left) and Prosecutor Kim Jeong-hwa of the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors' Office's Women and Children Crime Investigation Division. Photo by Legal Times.

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] A case in which the adoptive mother Jang Mo (35), who abused and caused the death of 16-month-old adopted child Jeong-in, was proven guilty of murder and sentenced to 35 years in prison in the appellate trial has been selected as an exemplary trial case.

On the 21st, the Supreme Prosecutors' Office announced that it had selected four cases, including the 'Jeong-in abuse death case' handled by the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors' Office, as exemplary trial cases for November.

First, Gong Bong-suk, head prosecutor of the Women and Children Crime Investigation Division at the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors' Office (Judicial Research and Training Institute class 32), and prosecutor Kim Jeong-hwa (class 37) directly participated in the trial as investigating prosecutors, proving that the cause of death of the victim child could not have occurred without considerable external force. They also demonstrated the defendant’s indifferent attitude during the victim child’s health condition and rescue process with objective evidence such as mobile phone videos, leading to a heavy sentence. Jang, the adoptive mother of Jeong-in, was sentenced to life imprisonment in the first trial and 35 years in prison in the appellate trial.

In particular, the prosecution conducted witness examinations of nine people over seven trial days in the first trial and submitted four written opinions. The final statement was delivered through a presentation lasting about an hour. In the appellate trial, the prosecution examined two witnesses and submitted seven written opinions.

Kang Baek-shin, head prosecutor of the trial division at the Seoul Eastern District Prosecutors' Office (class 34), and prosecutor Lee Seung-woo (1st Bar Exam) submitted a comprehensive written opinion summarizing the crimes committed against 46 victims involving approximately 3.2 billion KRW in fraud. They actively argued the defendant’s poor criminal nature, including repeated similar offenses during the trial, leading to a 10-year prison sentence.

Additionally, the trial division of the Seoul Eastern District Prosecutors' Office submitted a written opinion emphasizing the legislative intent of the regulation regarding the interpretation of 'third-party communication mediation' in a telecommunications business law violation case acquitted in the appellate trial. They also actively responded at the trial division level by preliminarily changing the indictment and filing an appeal in similar cases, resulting in a Supreme Court remand ruling. The trial division led by head prosecutor Kang was also selected as an exemplary trial case last month.

Lee Yoo-seon, head prosecutor of the trial division at the Seongnam Branch Office (class 34), and prosecutor Lee Soo-jung (class 41) directly interviewed the victim in a case involving long-term sexual abuse of a girlfriend, including rape causing injury. They submitted additional evidence such as medical certificates and victim photos proving prolonged abuse, highlighting the severity of the victim’s harm. They also submitted written opinions regarding the evidentiary value of witness statements, leading to a four-year prison sentence.

In another case involving rape of a victim with level 1 intellectual disability, they played a video-recorded CD containing the victim’s testimony and highlighted the credibility of the victim’s statement through witness examination of a statement analyst, resulting in a seven-year prison sentence.

Finally, Choi Dae-gun, head prosecutor of the trial division at the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office (class 34), and prosecutor Jeon Woo-jin (class 44) recognized a witness who gave false testimony in court despite hearing false defamatory remarks directly from the defendant as a perjury offender, based on statements from accompanying persons and recorded phone conversations as evidence.

They also identified a witness who committed perjury to release a ship involved in methamphetamine smuggling, indicted together, as a perjury offender through forensic analysis of the witness’s mobile phone and statements from accomplices.

A representative from the Supreme Prosecutors' Office stated, "Going forward, the prosecution will continue to actively discover and encourage exemplary work cases of trial prosecutors to become a prosecution that works centered on the people."

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