"Trying to Poison Me"… Supreme Court Sentences 60-Year-Old with Delusional Disorder to 20 Years for Murder and Arson

A man in his 60s who, deluded by the paranoia that people around him were trying to poison him, murdered a former coworker living next door and set fire to his own house was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

According to the legal community on the 7th, the Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Presiding Justice Lee Heung-gu) upheld the original sentence of 20 years imprisonment and ordered 5 years of probation for Kim (64), who was charged with murder and arson of an inhabited building.

Supreme Court in Seocho-dong, Seoul.

The court stated, "The claim that the original court's sentencing violated the principle of proportionality or the essential content of the principle of responsibility ultimately amounts to an argument of excessive sentencing," adding, "Considering the defendant's age, character, environment, relationship with the victims, motives, means and consequences of each crime, and circumstances after the crimes as recorded, it cannot be said that the first trial court's decision to sentence the defendant to 20 years imprisonment, which the original court maintained, is seriously unjust," thus rejecting the appeal.

Since 2017, Kim had harbored delusions that people around him, including his younger sister, were trying to poison him by giving him objects or food contaminated with poison.

From May 2021, Kim worked as a taxi driver at a company in Seoul. Around April 2022, he developed the delusion that his coworker A, who worked with him, was giving him poisoned food or secretly entering his house to poison his food. A lived in the same multi-family housing complex as Kim, and they interacted as neighbors.

Kim also believed that another colleague, B, had given him a blanket contaminated with poison, which worsened his health and led to his dismissal from the company in May 2022, fostering ill feelings toward both A and B.

On January 8, 2023, while talking with A at A's house, Kim said, "I want to kill B." When A responded, "Don't do that, what good would killing B do?" Kim thought, "A must be conspiring with someone to poison me together with B," and decided to kill A.

Later, around 8:36 p.m., Kim returned to his own house in the same housing complex, grabbed a hammer he usually kept on the bedroom floor to prepare for intrusions, and went back to A's house.

Upon encountering A, Kim said, "Who ordered you? Tell me," and struck A's head and shoulders multiple times with the hammer. Kim dragged A into a room, climbed on top of him, and said, "Who is the person who ordered you? Speak. If you talk, I will spare you. If you don't, you must die," while strangling A with both hands. When A said, "No one ordered me," Kim struck A's head repeatedly with the hammer again, causing fatal head injuries, and A died on the spot.

Meanwhile, Kim had tried to install additional locks on his front door and room door when moving in, but the landlord C prevented it. Kim believed that C was also helping A and B to poison him, harboring ill feelings toward C as well.

After killing A, before fleeing to his mother's house in Incheon, Kim decided to take revenge on C, who he believed had helped A poison him. Around 11 p.m. the same day, he took two plastic bottles filled with gasoline stored under the kitchen sink, entered a room, piled blankets and clothes on a mattress on the floor, poured gasoline over them, and ignited a piece of paper using the kitchen gas stove, setting fire to the gasoline-soaked area. The fire spread to the walls, ceiling, and throughout the room.

Arson of an inhabited building is punished much more severely than general arson.

Even after being prosecuted, Kim claimed that the victims had conspired to kill him.

The first trial court found Kim guilty of both murder and arson of an inhabited building but recognized that he was in a state of diminished responsibility due to delusional disorder, sentencing him to 20 years imprisonment and ordering 5 years of probation.

The court explained the sentencing rationale, stating, "This case involves the defendant killing a former coworker and neighbor by repeatedly striking him with a hammer and committing arson at night in a multi-family housing complex where many people live. Considering the nature, method, and brutality of the crimes, the guilt is very serious," but also "considering that the defendant committed the crimes in a state of diminished responsibility due to delusional disorder and appears to still be in a similar mental state, and that he has no prior criminal record except a fine 10 years ago, these were taken as mitigating factors."

On the other hand, the court dismissed the request to order Kim to wear an electronic location tracking device.

The court first cited Supreme Court precedents, stating, "The 'risk of reoffending murder' as stipulated in the Act on Electronic Monitoring Devices means more than just the possibility of reoffending; it requires a substantial likelihood that the applicant for the order will commit murder again in the future and disturb legal peace."

It continued, "Based solely on the evidence submitted by the prosecution, it is insufficient to recognize a substantial likelihood that the defendant will commit murder again in the future and disturb legal peace to the extent that ordering the attachment of a location tracking device is warranted."

Both the prosecution and Kim appealed, but the appellate court dismissed both appeals.

The Supreme Court also found no problem with the appellate court's judgment.

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