Police and prosecutors have applied different charges to Jang Yoon-gi, who killed high school student Lee Chae-won. Police applied a general murder charge, but prosecutors sent him to trial on charges of murder in connection with rape, saying he had a sexual assault motive.
According to the legal community on the 10th, the two charges differ starting with their statutory sentences. Under criminal law, general murder carries a sentence of at least five years in prison, while murder in connection with rape can only result in a death sentence or life imprisonment.
What prosecutors focused on was Jang's behavior before and after the crime and his established pattern in prior sex crimes. Prosecutors concluded that Jang subdued the victim from behind and tried to drag her to a vehicle, then killed her when she strongly resisted. They also viewed the method of subduing as similar to the one he used when sexually assaulting a female part-time coworker just before the crime. A damaged real doll found in his studio apartment and a past record of illegal filming were also examined as circumstantial evidence of a sexual purpose.
Police, on the other hand, found insufficient evidence to directly prove an attempted sexual assault. Based on factors such as Jang's repeated statement that he "committed the crime after losing interest in life," police concluded it was a retaliatory crime stemming from having his romantic advances rejected, and applied a general murder charge. Some within the police argued that a murder charge with a sexual crime motive should be reviewed, but it was not reflected in the final charges referred to prosecutors on the grounds that it relied only on circumstances without direct evidence.
Some view the difference as hard to see as merely a difference in legal interpretation. After it became known that Jang's father and uncle are both active police officers, and with the head of the case investigation team arrested on charges of destroying evidence, suspicions have been raised that police may have reduced the charges or conducted the investigation passively. However, whether such suspicions actually affected the application of the charges is a matter that must be revealed through future investigation.
Prosecutors indicted him solely on the charge of murder in connection with rape as the main charge. Not adding general murder as an alternative charge is interpreted as a sign of confidence in proving the charge. The legal community believes that because the act of murder itself is acknowledged in the case, there is room for the court to apply a general murder charge even if it does not recognize a sexual assault motive.
The case is also reviving controversy over police responsibility for primary investigations and their standards for judgment following the adjustment of investigative authority between prosecutors and police. As criticism emerges that the circumstances and internal opinions secured in the early stages of the investigation were not sufficiently reflected in the final charges in a violent crime of great public interest, the need to review the police's responsible investigation system is also growing.
