A husband and son who killed an 80-year-old woman they had cared for over a decade have received final prison sentences from the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court's Third Division, presided over by Justice Lee Heung-gu, on Thursday upheld a lower court ruling that sentenced an 80-year-old man identified as A to three years in prison on murder charges, and his son in his 50s, identified as B, to seven years on charges of murdering a lineal ascendant.
A and B were indicted on charges of killing the 80-year-old woman C, who was A's wife and B's mother, by feeding her sleeping pills and strangling her with an electrical cord at their apartment in Goyang, Gyeonggi Province, on March 4 last year.
A and B, who had cared for C for about 10 years, struggled to support her as her health gradually deteriorated and her mobility worsened. According to investigators, the two killed C and attempted to take their own lives after other family members became unable to provide financial support due to economic hardship, and as they faced an eviction request from their residence and issues over admitting C to a nursing home. After the killing, they jumped into the Han River from Jamsil Hangang Park in Seoul but were rescued after a citizen reported them.
The first-trial court sentenced A to three years and B to seven years, recognizing that the two had conspired to commit the murder and that A had participated by handing over the murder weapon. "The defendants devotedly cared for the victim, who had limited mobility, for more than 10 years, which appears to have entailed great sacrifice and effort," the first-trial court said. "Nevertheless, the victim's condition gradually worsened, and the defendants could no longer receive financial support from other family members, while the victim refused to go to a nursing home. The resulting frustration appears to have significantly influenced the defendants' decision to commit the crime."
The appellate court reached the same conclusion. A and B argued at the appellate trial that they committed the crime at C's request or with her consent, or that they were in a state of mental incapacity or diminished mental capacity at the time, but the court did not accept these claims.
The Supreme Court dismissed the defendants' appeal, stating, "There is no error in the lower court's guilty verdict that exceeded the limits of the principle of free evaluation of evidence or misinterpreted the legal principles on the establishment of murder and murder of a lineal ascendant in a way that affected the judgment."
