Prosecutors sought the death penalty, but the first trial sentenced him to life imprisonment... Prosecutors have appealed
In the case of Jang Yoon-ki, a defendant on charges of 'murder in the course of rape' who was sentenced to life imprisonment despite prosecutors seeking the death penalty in the first trial, the Gwangju District Prosecutors' Office filed an appeal on the 2nd, judging the sentence to be inappropriately light. The Gwangju District Prosecutors' Office submitted an appeal to the Gwangju District Court against the first trial verdict for Jang, who was indicted and detained on charges including murder in the course of rape under the Special Act on the Punishment of Sexual Crimes, citing inappropriate sentencing and misinterpretation of the law. The first trial panel was Criminal Division 13 of the Gwangju District Court (presided over by Chief Judge Lee Jung-ho), and prosecutors had sought the death penalty.
Jang is charged with abducting Lee Chae-won (then 16, a second-year high school student), who was on her way home, in a car near a school in Wolgye-dong, Gwangsan District, Gwangju, at around 12:10 a.m. on May 5, then attempting to sexually assault her and murdering her. He is also accused of swinging a weapon at a male high school student who ran over after hearing her screams in an attempt to kill him. He was also referred to trial on charges of stalking and sexually assaulting a Vietnamese woman who worked with him at a part-time job, and of secretly filming the body of a teenage girl while serving as a social service agent.
In its ruling, the first trial court stated that Jang abducted the female student with the intent to rape and murdered her when the assault failed, and also attempted to kill the male student who ran to the scene with a weapon. The court pointed out that Jang acted calmly after the crime, using a laundromat and a hair salon, and that throughout the investigation and trial he showed an attitude of trying to evade the situation rather than offering sincere remorse.
The court said that considering the motive, method, and outcome of the crime, his culpability was so grave that permanently isolating him from society was warranted. However, it added, "It is difficult to conclude that there are special circumstances justifying a death sentence in a case where the defendant's very life must be denied for the survival and continuation of our society." The absence of an absolute life sentence without parole to bridge the gap between the death penalty and life imprisonment was also taken into account. The court additionally ordered Jang to wear an electronic ankle monitor and banned him from working at institutions related to children, adolescents, and the disabled for 10 years.
As of the filing of the appeal, Jang's side had not yet appealed.
