Court Does Not Detain Sindang Station Staff Murder Suspect... Academia Says "Retaliation Concerns Should Also Be Included as Grounds for Detention"

A memorial procession of citizens continues on the 19th at the women's restroom of Sindang Station on Seoul Subway Line 2, where a 20-year-old station attendant was murdered after stalking. Photo by Moon Honam munonam@

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyung-min] As criticism arises that the court’s dismissal of the suspect’s detention request was a decisive factor in the 'Sindang Station Staff Murder Case,' the academic community is drawing attention to the argument that 'fear of retaliation' should be included as a reason for issuing detention warrants.

According to the legal community on the 19th, Professor Kim Hyuk of the Department of Law at Pukyong National University argued in a paper titled "Redesigning the Detention System to Prevent Retaliatory Crimes and Protect Crime Victims," published in December last year in the Korean Victimology Association’s academic journal 'Victimology Studies,' that the court should actively issue detention warrants for suspects with a high risk of retaliatory crimes by revising the regulations.

Professor Kim pointed out, "The perspective on detention has so far not significantly deviated from a two-sided view centered on the conflict between the state and the suspect/defendant," adding, "This inability to prevent retaliatory crimes inevitably has a negative impact on victim protection."

Currently, when the court receives a request for a detention warrant from the prosecution regarding a suspect, it primarily considers the necessity of issuing the warrant based on concerns about evidence tampering and flight risk.

Because of this, in the case of the Sindang Station staff murderer, although the police applied for a detention warrant when the victim filed a complaint in October last year, the court reportedly dismissed the warrant solely on the grounds that "the suspect has a fixed residence and there is no concern about evidence tampering or flight."

Professor Kim emphasized, "Detention itself is not always an 'absolute evil' to be avoided," and stated, "In cases where there is a fear of retaliation, detention is the most effective emergency measure to protect victims."

He further argued that in advanced countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and France, "matters related to retaliatory crimes or harm to victims are stipulated as independent grounds for detention," and proposed that 'concerns about harm to victims, etc.' be established as an independent reason for detention and that an appeal system against the dismissal of detention warrants be introduced.

Meanwhile, following this incident, the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office announced plans to promote measures such as abolishing the non-prosecution provision in the Stalking Punishment Act and conducting principle-based detention investigations for stalking crimes.

The academic community had raised such arguments early on. Professors Shim Young-joo of Inha University Law School and Lee Sang-han of Chungbuk National University Law School published a paper titled "Review and Suggestions on the Amendment Discussion of the Stalking Crime Punishment Act" in April in the legal association’s academic journal 'Law and Justice,' arguing that "it is desirable to delete the non-prosecution provision to protect victims."

The authors explained that the non-prosecution provision was created to prevent excessive punishment by broadly defining 'stalking behavior' in the Stalking Punishment Act and to faithfully reflect the victim’s intentions in case handling.

However, as seen in the case of Lee Seok-jun last year, who harbored resentment against a woman who reported sexual assault and murdered her family, the authors pointed out that "victims may find it difficult to actively express their intention to seek punishment, and secondary damage such as coercion into settlement through persuasion or threats may occur," thus arguing for the deletion of the non-prosecution provision.

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