Despite Urgent Reports, Police 'Inadequate Response'... A Look into National Compensation Lawsuits

On the 2nd, during the national mourning period following the large-scale crush disaster in Itaewon, visitors continued to pay their respects at the memorial space set up near Itaewon Station in Yongsan-gu, Seoul. Photo by Jinhyung Kang aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] As criticisms arise that the police's initial response to the 'Itaewon tragedy' was inadequate, there is a growing expectation that lawsuits seeking compensation from the state for its responsibility may be filed one after another.

According to the legal community on the 2nd, courts have considered in state compensation lawsuits filed on the grounds that police officers failed to properly exercise their authority for emergency relief or protective measures: ▲the extent to which the infringed legal interests of the citizens or the damages suffered by the citizens were serious and urgent ▲whether the police officers could have foreseen the situation on site and taken measures to prevent the occurrence of the outcome ▲whether it was difficult for the victims to avoid or prevent the danger through their own efforts.

One case where state compensation liability was recognized due to the police’s inadequate response to a 112 emergency call was the 2012 'Oh Wonchun case.' In April 2012, Oh Wonchun kidnapped and murdered a victim passing in front of an elementary school in Suwon. The victim reported to the Gyeonggi Provincial Police Agency’s Life Safety Division 112 Integrated Center while Oh Wonchun was off guard, but the police misinterpreted the report as a 'marital dispute,' resulting in delayed dispatch and inadequate initial response. The bereaved family filed a claim for 360 million KRW in damages against the state.

The second trial of this case limited the state’s compensation liability to 21.3 million KRW, stating, "Even if the police had searched earlier, it cannot be guaranteed that the victim could have been rescued alive." However, the Supreme Court’s 2nd Division (Presiding Justice Cho Heedae) expanded the scope of the state’s responsibility, stating, "If the 112 call center officers had properly conveyed the content and seriousness of the report to the responding officers, the victim could have been rescued alive." Following this, the retrial ordered the state to compensate the bereaved family a total of 78.32 million KRW.

Compensation liability was also recognized when police officers who responded to a call left the scene without taking proper measures. On the evening of March 23, 2018, around 9 p.m., Mr. A was drinking alone at a restaurant in Gangwon Province and collapsed in the restroom. Responding officers from a nearby police substation, who received a report of a "drunken person collapsed," took Mr. A to the first-floor parking lot. When Mr. A could not provide a specific address, the officers told him to "go home" and left.

Later, police officers returned to the scene after a citizen reported seeing Mr. A fallen inside an ATM booth. The officers told the reporter, "We know the situation, so you can go home." They also rolled down the patrol car window, asked Mr. A, "Are you okay?" and then left. Mr. A, who remained collapsed, was taken to the hospital the next morning but died from traumatic skull fractures and other injuries.

The bereaved family, including Mr. A’s spouse and two children, filed a state compensation lawsuit, claiming, "The police neglected Mr. A without rescue or protective measures based on vague judgment, leading to his death."

In 2019, the Seoul Central District Court Civil Division 34 (Presiding Judge Kim Jeonggon) ruled that the state must compensate the bereaved family over 100 million KRW. The court stated, "Police have various authorities granted by relevant laws to appropriately exercise necessary measures not only for criminal investigations but also for crime prevention and maintaining public peace and order."

The court added, "At the second dispatch, it was insufficient for the officers to only roll down the patrol car window to check the condition after confirming it during the first dispatch." The officers should have checked Mr. A’s health condition and taken appropriate protective measures, such as bringing him to the police station.

Furthermore, the court noted, "Even in late March, nighttime temperatures in Gangwon Province drop significantly. There was a serious risk to life and body that Mr. A, who was heavily intoxicated, could not prevent on his own." It added, "The police officers, who received two reports from concerned citizens who foresaw the risk of an accident, could have easily anticipated the danger based on the report content and the condition at the time."

Meanwhile, regarding the recent Itaewon tragedy, Police Commissioner Yoon Heegeun and Minister of the Interior and Safety Lee Sangmin have expressed apologies. The police department placed the chief of the Yongsan Police Station, the jurisdictional police station, on standby suspension that day.

The 112 call recordings released by the police the day before contained details of citizens reporting and explaining concerns about the risk of crushing more than four hours before the accident occurred on the 29th of last month, demanding police dispatch. It also revealed that the police did not actively control the crowd at the scene.

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