Supreme Court to Deliver Final Verdict Today on Adoptive Parents in 'Jeong-in's Death' Case... 35 Years and 5 Years Prison Sentences in Second Trial

Citizens hold placards in front of the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul, on November 5 last year, the day of the appellate trial's closing arguments for the adoptive parents accused of abusing and causing the death of 16-month-old girl Jeong-in./Photo by Kang Jin-hyung aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] The Supreme Court's final ruling on Jang, the adoptive mother who was sentenced to 35 years in prison in the appellate court for abusing and causing the death of 16-month-old adopted daughter Jeong-in, will be announced on the 28th.

The Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Presiding Justice Kim Jae-hyung) will hold the appellate hearing at 11:15 a.m. on the same day for Jang, who was indicted on charges of murder and habitual child abuse under the Child Welfare Act, and Ahn, the adoptive father, who was indicted on charges of child abuse and child abandonment and neglect under the Child Welfare Act.

Jang was arrested and prosecuted on charges of habitually assaulting and abusing her adopted daughter Jeong-in from June to October 2020, and delivering a strong blow to Jeong-in's abdomen on October 13, which caused her death.

In the first trial, Jang was found guilty of both murder and child abuse charges and was sentenced to life imprisonment. Ahn was sentenced to five years in prison.

During the first trial, Jang argued that there was no intent to kill, but the prosecution claimed that there was implied intent to murder. The first trial court also ruled that "it was sufficiently foreseeable that the victim would suffer fatal injuries leading to death," thus establishing the murder charge.

During the appellate trial, the prosecution requested a change in the indictment to add the allegation that Jang "struck Jeong-in's abdomen strongly with fists or hands" in addition to "strongly stepping on Jeong-in's abdomen with feet," and the court approved this.

The appellate court also stated, "The defendant's method of crime involved 'the application of strong blunt force using the body,' but it cannot be definitively determined whether it was 'strongly hitting with hands or fists' or 'strongly stepping with feet.' However, citing a Supreme Court ruling that in murder cases, if the method of the crime cannot be specifically and clearly recognized, it is permissible to describe it generally," and concluded, "This court generally recognizes the defendant's crime as 'applying strong blunt force by either strongly hitting with hands or fists or strongly stepping with feet,' as stated in the crime facts below," thus acknowledging Jang's act of murder.

However, the appellate court lowered the sentence from life imprisonment to 35 years, reasoning that although Jang's crime cannot be considered accidental, it is difficult to conclude that she committed murder with premeditation, and that she actively desired or hoped for the result of Jeong-in's death, as evidenced by performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) in the taxi transporting Jeong-in to the hospital.

The court stated, "Considering the severity and cruelty of this crime, the defendant's culpability is very serious. Furthermore, given the need to strictly punish child abuse and murder crimes to prevent similar offenses and protect potential victims, the defendant must be punished with a severe sentence."

However, the court added, "Life imprisonment is a lifelong deprivation of freedom that permanently isolates the defendant from society, second only to the death penalty in severity. Therefore, to impose life imprisonment, it must be recognized that there are objective circumstances justifying permanent isolation of the defendant from society, based on factors stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act, including the defendant's age, occupation and career, character, intelligence, education level, upbringing, family relationships, criminal history, relationship with the victim, motive, presence or absence of premeditation and preparation, means and methods, degree of cruelty and brutality, severity of the outcome, defendant's feelings and attitude after the crime, presence or absence of remorse and guilt, degree of victim recovery, and risk of recidivism. Whether such circumstances exist must be carefully judged considering the principles of proportionality and responsibility in criminal justice."

Ahn, the adoptive father, who was charged with neglecting Jeong-in and allowing Jang's abuse to continue, was sentenced to five years in prison in the first trial.

The appellate court accepted Ahn's appeal and acquitted him of the abuse charge that he held Jeong-in on his lap, tightly grasped both of her arms, and forced her to clap her hands quickly and strongly, causing her pain and crying, but continued to hold her arms and make her clap strongly.

The court ruled that the evidence submitted by the prosecution was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Ahn had the intent to emotionally abuse Jeong-in.

However, the appellate court upheld the guilty verdict for neglect under the Child Welfare Act and sentenced Ahn to five years in prison, the same as the first trial.

Meanwhile, following the 'Jeong-in death' case, the National Assembly amended the Child Abuse Punishment Act early last year.

The revised law did not include provisions to increase statutory penalties for child abuse crimes or strengthen punishment for perpetrators, but added clauses requiring local governments or investigative agencies to immediately begin investigation or inquiry upon receiving a report of child abuse.

Additionally, new provisions were introduced allowing police or officials dispatched to the scene to enter locations other than the reported site, and requiring police or officials investigating child abuse cases to separate and interview the reporter, witnesses, victim children, and perpetrators of child abuse.

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