Father and Aunt Seal Front Door and Block Windows... Prevent 7-Year-Old Daughter from Leaving Home

“Blocking the Door and Sunlight Saying ‘Someone Is Trying to Harm Me’
Court: “The Guilt Is Not Light, but Imprisonment Is Unjust””

The biological father and aunts, who prevented the child from leaving the house and blocked external contact, were sentenced to prison for neglect and abuse in the first trial, but their sentences were reduced to probation in the appeal trial.

A (57) lived with his biological daughter C, who was 7 years old at the time, from November 2018 to April 2020, preventing her from going outside or having any external contact. C's aunts, including B (63, female), were also involved.

They did not go outside at all, sealed the front door, and covered all the windows in the house with boxes, blocking sunlight and wind. It was investigated that A and others carried out these actions because they believed that someone outside was watching and trying to harm them, including C.

As a result, C was unable to attend the elementary school preliminary gathering and could not enroll in school normally. She also missed online classes conducted due to COVID-19 and did not receive proper compulsory education. Additionally, she did not receive appropriate medical treatment even when she was sick.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

A and others continuously instilled the mistaken belief in C that "the outside is dangerous," causing C to develop a distorted mindset that she should not go outside.

A, who was charged with child abandonment and neglect under the Child Welfare Act, was sentenced to 10 months in prison in the original trial, while B and two others were sentenced to 4 months in prison.

However, the Daegu District Court Criminal Appeal Division 1 (Chief Judge Lee Sang-gyun) overturned the original verdict in the appeal trial and sentenced A to 10 months in prison with a 2-year probation period, announced on the 14th. B and others were also given reduced sentences of 4 months in prison with 2 years probation each.

The court pointed out, "The defendants' guilt is not light, as they neglected basic protection and care for the victim child, emotionally abused the child, negatively affecting her development," but added, "However, considering that they seemed to have made efforts to provide for the child's basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter, and that the child's biological mother petitioned for leniency, the original sentence was deemed too harsh and unfair," explaining the reasons for sentencing.

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