Police investigating the case of Jang Yoon-gi, the perpetrator in the "Gwangju high school girl murder case," are grappling with an unexpected "internal collusion suspicion." Suspicions have emerged that Jang's father, a serving police officer, partly concealed circumstances of his son's crime, shaking confidence in the police investigation. The Korean National Police Agency hurriedly dispatched inspectors to the Gwangju Gwangsan Police Station to establish the facts. As prosecutors have successively uncovered key evidence and details of the crime in the Jang Yoon-gi case, voices within the police are calling for a thorough internal inspection for the sake of police credibility.
According to reporting by Seoul Economic Daily, the National Police Agency sent two inspectors to the Gwangsan Police Station on the 3rd of this month to review the entire investigation process by the Gwangsan station's investigation team. The National Office of Investigation is examining whether police properly investigated the Jang Yoon-gi case through the investigation inspection. Through the inspection, police plan to examine whether there are circumstances suggesting that Jang's father, a senior inspector with the Gwangju Police Agency, intervened in the investigation. They also intend to determine whether there was faulty initial investigation or whether investigative details leaked externally.
The most critical part the investigation inspection must clarify is that the National Forensic Service's DNA analysis report regarding the sex doll found in Jang Yoon-gi's studio apartment was omitted. After making an emergency arrest of Jang, police searched his studio apartment and found a sex doll with damage to its neck and chest areas, then requested a detailed analysis from the National Forensic Service. The analysis found Jang's DNA on the sex doll, and the National Forensic Service delivered the analysis report to police around May 18.
However, police, who had already transferred Jang's case to prosecutors on May 14, should have additionally forwarded the report to prosecutors, but it was submitted only on the 2nd of this month, six weeks later. Police explained it was "an operational error that occurred during the data transfer process between the forensic investigation and criminal justice systems," but they could not avoid criticism that they failed to transfer key evidence to prosecutors. As a result, prosecutors who took over the case only learned that there was a damaged sex doll in the studio apartment after visiting it immediately following the transfer. Key evidence for prosecution was nearly omitted.
Police have also launched a general inspection of Jang's father, Senior Inspector Jang. The matter concerns suspicions that Senior Inspector Jang visited his son's studio apartment right after the crime and disposed of evidence such as the sex doll and mobile phone. Four days after the crime, Senior Inspector Jang visited his son's studio apartment and dismantled the sex doll inside into several pieces. He was also found to have destroyed Jang Yoon-gi's belongings, including an older mobile phone, by burning them. Although Jang Yoon-gi did not tell his family the address or passcode of his studio apartment, Senior Inspector Jang was confirmed to have obtained the address and passcode through the police officer handling the case. The fact that police connected a phone call between Senior Inspector Jang and Jang Yoon-gi in the presence of an investigator on the day the sex doll was discarded is also included in the general inspection. Senior Inspector Jang is known to have taken sick leave right after the crime.
Had the key evidence not been found, Jang Yoon-gi would have faced only ordinary murder charges. However, judging from the damage to the chest and neck areas of the sex doll, prosecutors concluded that Jang committed murder for the purpose of a sex crime and indicted him with detention on charges including rape and murder under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Sexual Crimes.
Even after Jang Yoon-gi's indictment, additional circumstances of the crime continue to emerge. On the day of the crime, Jang parked his SUV in a secluded space, opened the rear passenger-side door, and subdued the victim by wrapping his arm around her neck from behind. This evidence was also reportedly found by prosecutors. Prosecutors also found that immediately after the crime, as Jang closed the rear passenger-side door, the victim's bloodstains were left on the exterior of the vehicle body.
Within the police, voices of concern about the investigation's credibility are being raised. The fact that Jang Yoon-gi's father is a police officer could itself adversely affect public opinion, and now circumstances have emerged suggesting Senior Inspector Jang destroyed evidence for his son. On top of this, police not only failed to transfer key evidence to prosecutors despite securing it, but prosecutors who took over the case have successively secured new decisive evidence and moved to submit it as trial evidence, raising questions about the police's investigative competence.
A senior police officer working in Seoul sighed and said, "If the facts are not thoroughly established through this inspection, it is clear that police credibility with the public will be seriously damaged." He added, "Prosecutors are already successively finding evidence, and police have been implicated in destroying evidence. Even if it's late, if we don't want to be branded with the disgrace of protecting our own, we must at least conduct a proper post-inspection to take a little less flak."
