Caregiver Causes Choking Death of Dementia Patient by Feeding Whole Peach Chunk, Sentence Reduced on Appeal

Court: "Responsibility for Death Cannot Be Attributed Solely to Defendant"

A caregiver looking after a dementia patient fed the patient whole chunks of peach, which ultimately led to the patient's choking death. The caregiver, who was prosecuted on this charge, received a reduced sentence through the appeal trial. Photo is not related to the specific content of the article.

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Jung-wan] A caregiver who was prosecuted for causing the suffocation death of a dementia patient by feeding a whole peach has received a reduced sentence in the appellate court.

On the 22nd, the Criminal Appeals Division 3 of Daejeon District Court (Presiding Judge Moon Bo-kyung) overturned the original sentence of 4 months imprisonment for A (65), who was charged with involuntary manslaughter, and sentenced him to 4 months imprisonment with a 1-year probation.

A, who was working at a nursing hospital in Dangjin, Chungnam, is accused of neglecting his duty of care by not cutting the peach snack given to B (77), who suffers from dementia, into small pieces and not confirming whether B swallowed it completely on June 30, 2019, which led to B's suffocation and death.

A caregiver accused of neglecting their duty of care at work, resulting in the suffocation death of a dementia patient, received a reduced sentence in the appellate court.
[Image source=Yonhap News]

B was taken to the hospital at the time with the peach lodged in his throat and received treatment, but was found to have died ten days later from aspiration pneumonia (a condition where food enters the airway causing suffocation) and other complications.

The first trial court stated as the reason for sentencing, "Although the victim was elderly and suffering from dementia, only consuming porridge or finely ground food, the defendant presumed that the victim would chew and swallow properly, so the negligence cannot be considered minor." However, A appealed, claiming the original sentence was excessively harsh.

The appellate court ruled, "The defendant is deeply remorseful, and all responsibility for the victim's death cannot be solely attributed to the defendant."

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