"Feeling No Guilt" Young Man Who Killed Taxi Driver Sentenced to 30 Years in Prison on Appeal

Appellate Court: "Prepared Weapon in Advance...
Original Court's Decision Not to Reduce Sentence for Diminished Mental Capacity Is Proper"

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Jeong-wan] The appellate court also handed down a heavy sentence to a man in his 20s who killed a taxi driver by repeatedly wielding a weapon inside a taxi in operation.

The Criminal Division 1 of Suwon High Court (Presiding Judge Shin Sook-hee) maintained the first trial's sentence of 30 years imprisonment and accepted the prosecution's request for medical custody in the appellate sentencing hearing on the 13th for A, who was charged with murder, attempted murder, and special obstruction of official duties causing injury. Additionally, the order to attach an electronic location tracking device for 15 years was also upheld.

A was indicted for stabbing the victim B, who was driving the taxi he was riding in, multiple times in the neck and chest area with a weapon on a road near Migeum Station in Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi Province, at around 9:50 p.m. on May 14 last year, resulting in B's death.

It was previously understood that A met a woman C through a chat application under the pretense of a conditional meeting, prepared a weapon in advance intending to kill her, but fearing the plan would fail, changed the target and killed B instead.

He is also charged with assaulting two employees from the Seongnam Probation Center who came to visit him in the official visitation room of the detention center in June last year, using pens and other objects.

In the first trial, the court sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment, stating, "The defendant showed no remorse during the investigation by the authorities, saying 'I do not feel guilty and have no desire to ask for forgiveness from the victim and the bereaved family,' and showed no particular effort to make restitution."

In response, A appealed, claiming that "at the time of the crime, he was in a state of diminished mental capacity due to schizophrenia," arguing that the sentence was excessive.

The appellate court stated, "Since the prosecution requested medical custody at this stage, the original judgment cannot be maintained and is overturned," adding, "However, regarding the claim of diminished mental capacity, it is acknowledged that the defendant was in such a state at the time of the crime, but considering that he prepared the weapon in advance and the circumstances after the crime, the original court's decision not to recognize diminished capacity mitigation is deemed lawful."

The court further ruled, "Murder is an absolutely unacceptable crime, and the bereaved family is petitioning for severe punishment against the defendant," adding, "Random crimes like this must be severely punished, and considering various sentencing factors such as the defendant's lack of remorse during the investigation and no prior criminal record, the sentence was determined."

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