"Killing Suncheon Teen." Park Dae Sung...I met the police just before the crime.

■ Host: Anchor Yoon Bori, anchor Woo Jong-hoon
■ Starring: Lawyer Seo Jeong-bin

* The text below may differ from the actual broadcast content, so please check the broadcast for more accurate information. Please specify [YTN Newswide] when quoting.

[Anchor]
It was revealed that Park Dae-sung, who brutally murdered a teenage woman in Suncheon, confronted the police 20 minutes before the crime.

On the other hand, a 3-year-old child assaulted the child and his grandmother on the bus for touching his body. Let's look at the legal issues in various incidents. Attorney Seo Jeong-bin is here. Please come in.

Park Dae-sung, who stabbed a teenage woman several times to death. It was handed over to the prosecution yesterday. Let's see Park Dae-sung leaving the police station first and continue the story.

Although Park Dae-sung has repeatedly said sorry, he actually feels a bit obligated to be authentic. How did you like it?

[Jeongbin Seo]
When I saw that scene, I had no choice but to doubt whether he was really willing to apologize to the victims or their bereaved families. In fact, in the course of criminal cases, there are many cases in which the attitude after committing such a crime is that they regret the crime, say sorry to the victim a little more seriously, or at least seem to be afraid of punishment afterwards. In fact, when I see this scene, the answer is very dry and short, and the apology to the victim is just repeated without any specific details, and most of the questions about the major situations are not said at all, so are they really reflecting on themselves? At least I had to question whether I had any fear of my punishment.

[Anchor]
If you listen to Park Dae-sung's words that just left, you remember the crime little by little, but this is to admit the crime. Should I say that Park Dae-sung's attitude is this kind of statement that puts future trials on the table?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Of course, we cannot completely rule out the possibility that, as we claim now, alcohol has actually prevented us from remembering the situation late at the time. However, there may be cases where you make such statements in advance in order to carry out arguments in your favor in future trials, as you said, even though you actually remember them. I admit that I'm talking now, but I don't remember because I was in a drunk situation, some of them remember, but most of them also don't remember, but since then, this means that he was intoxicated, so he couldn't remember, and he was also intoxicated, so he may be saying that from now on in advance to claim that he was in a situation with mental and physical weakness or mental disability at the time of the crime. Of course, this part will be revealed through a trial to see if it has actually been affected like that.

[Anchor]
Then, how much do you see the possibility of alcohol reduction, mental and physical loss, and weakness?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, if we divide it a little, I think it will be very difficult to be recognized for alcohol reduction. In the end, the court will specifically examine the circumstances before and after the case to determine whether it was actually a crime caused by intoxication or whether it was capable of discriminating things at the time. However, considering the circumstances revealed so far, many circumstances show that it is quite doubtful whether this is the behavior of a person who is intoxicated and has a disability in his or her ability to speak.

For example, the fact that they prepared a weapon in advance, showed such behavior as if they were looking for a target of the crime, specified the victim as a young woman, and showed a passerby approaching after the crime, so they ran away immediately, changed shoes, or moved to bars and karaoke afterwards, so this drunk reduction seems to be very difficult to admit in the end.

On the other hand, he claims to have been suffering from mental illness, but it seems that the details of that have not yet been revealed. In this regard, whether there was a mental illness that the investigative agency was talking about, and if there were any history of such treatment at the hospital, if so, whether or not they were taking or stopping drugs at the time of this case, and whether this eventually affected the case, it is necessary to conduct a more detailed investigation and determine this.

[Anchor]
Park Dae-sung and the victim have never met each other. Therefore, the investigative agency is also investigating whether there is a crime of abnormal motive, and how do you judge whether there is a crime of abnormal motive, and how do you think this will affect Park Dae-sung's sentence in the future?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Ideal motivation is, after all, a different expression of the crime that was mainly used in the past. When there is no particular connection between the victim and the perpetrator and a clear direct motive cannot be identified in these crimes, it is called an abnormal synchronization crime. In order to judge these, whether there was a relationship with the victim before the incident, and whether there was a direct cause of the crime, such as conflict or dispute with the victim, and if such things are not identified, it is ultimately judged as an abnormal synchronization crime. In fact, this part can naturally affect sentencing when it eventually goes to trial.

In the end, if this is confirmed, it can be applied more unfavorably to sentencing because the ideal synchronous crime was committed without any clear motive, and if so, it can be seen as a risk factor that can commit this kind of crime again without any reason after being punished.

[Anchor]
But in the midst of this, the police said they had an interview with Park Dae-sung just before the crime. What kind of situation was this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
About 20 minutes before Park Dae-sung committed the crime, Park Dae-sung's brother reported. Park Dae-sung's brother reported that his younger brother Park Dae-sung was likely to make an extreme choice while he was drunk, and the police were dispatched to meet him in front of the store. When the police officer was dispatched, Park Dae-sung was drunk, but he was still able to communicate with the police officer's question. When asked about the risk of suicide attempts and this part, he answered well. Because of such a situation, the police did not detect any abnormal signs and seemed to have finished the interview for now, but since the incident took place about 20 to 15 minutes later, it remains regrettable that such an incident could have been prevented if something had been done in advance.

[Anchor]
And Park Dae-sung's past of violence is also being re-examined, so what measures could the police take in this case?

[Jeongbin Seo]
It is virtually impossible to determine whether the subject has a criminal record when such a report is received, but when such a report is received, you can take any protective measures after looking at the other person's condition. According to the Police Officer's Duty Execution Act, if such a drunk person clearly shows the risk of harming others, or if he/she clearly appears to be attempting suicide, he/she can be taken to the police station for a certain period of time to take protective measures. In fact, as I said earlier, it seems that it was difficult for police officers to take protective measures prematurely because Park Dae-sung was drunk but did not show a particularly strange appearance.

[Anchor]
Anyway, apart from the controversy over the police's response, the police saw the state just before Park Dae-sung committed the crime. Then, can the police's testimony about Park Dae-sung's condition, the degree of intoxication, and cognition be important evidence at that time?

[Jeongbin Seo]
When I first saw this, I thought that if Park Dae-sung claims a mental and physical disability in the future, the statements of police officers who were dispatched before that and such data could be important evidence to break the claim of mental and physical disability. Now Park Dae-sung claims that he cannot remember while drunk, and he can claim the reason for mental and physical disability in future trials. If that happens, it will be enough to assume that he would not have been in such a state of mental and physical disability 15 and 20 minutes later, as he would have been drunk until the police officer was dispatched, but he seemed to be in a normal state. Therefore, if there is such an argument, it will be used as an important data.

[Anchor]
We showed it on the screen a while ago, but right after the crime, Park Dae-sung was seen smiling and laughing on CCTV. It's literally human water. With this evaluation coming out, how do you think Park Dae-sung's attitude immediately after the crime and future sentences can be affected?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In media reports, many people suspect that there is such an anti-social personality disorder after seeing Park Dae-sung's interview or CCTV footage. Therefore, the investigative agency will also investigate this and proceed with the prosecution. If these points are revealed, it will eventually be applied to a very bad side in the trial and to a disadvantage against Park Dae-sung. As I said, if there is such a disability and it is determined that it was one of the main causes of this case, there is a good chance that there is a risk of committing the same crime even after receiving all the punishment in the future, so considering this, there is a greater possibility of a more serious sentence.

[Anchor]
Concerns about the so-called "don't ask" incident are inevitably growing. Not long ago, in Daegu, a man in his 40s wandered the streets with a weapon. What kind of situation was this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
This case happened in early September. In an alleyway in Daegu, a man in his 40s wore a mask and sunglasses and a club and a kitchen knife in both hands, making threats to passers-by around him. Citizens who witnessed the man eventually reported it to the police and fortunately, they were arrested before any casualties occurred.

[Anchor]
Fortunately, the crime against this man did not lead to a crime because the police suppressed it early, but what charges do you think he was charged with and what level of punishment do you think will be?

[Jeongbin Seo]
At that time, he was carrying a club in one hand and a kitchen knife in one hand, so he threatened people with dangerous items, so he is now being charged with special intimidation. In this case of special intimidation, you can face up to seven years in prison. Of course, if this case is a first-time offender, the sentence may be relatively light, but if there are many such violent convictions of the same kind, they can even be sentenced to prison.

[Anchor]
On the other hand, posts predicting some kind of deadly terrorism are being posted on the Internet, raising anxiety again. What kind of punishment is possible in the case of these writings?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, under the current law, if you announce something like murder and say that you have not actually advanced to preparation, you will be punished for threatening under the criminal law. However, under the criminal law, intimidation is subject to a sentence of up to three years in prison or a fine of up to 5 million won, so if you haven't actually prepared for murder on these similar cases so far, you're a first-time offender in many cases, and there are many cases where you're sentenced to probation because those points are recognized.

[Anchor]
I'd like to ask you a question about the blind spot of intimidation crimes, but threats that do not specify targets cannot be recognized as crimes under the current law. As I see it like this, there is also a need for a new law called the crime of public intimidation. What is your opinion on this?

[Jeongbin Seo]
As these incidents occur, there is still some discussion on whether they can be punished for intimidation. In general, intimidation is established when threatening a specific person, and when threatening an unspecified number of people, such as these cases, it is discussed as to who the victim will be identified and how far the scope will be set, and it is divided into cases where punishment is actually punished or a little difficult.

On the other hand, the level of punishment is so low that it is inappropriate to apply it to such matters where a lot of damage is caused by intimidation against an unspecified number of people. Therefore, it is more appropriate to apply threats that predict crimes against an unspecified number of people through Internet posts through such new regulations, such as public intimidation, and the level of punishment was slightly higher than that of general intimidation by allowing them to be sentenced to up to five years in prison. So, I think it's actually right for these regulations to be newly established and applied. I think more appropriate punishment will be possible.

[Anchor]
Let's move on to the next case. In the bus, a grandmother and a 3-year-old grandson were in the next seat, and a woman in her 20s assaulted her and her grandson because his arm touched her. The reason why you said that was absurd, how did you see it?

[Jeongbin Seo]
On the bus, a 3-year-old child hit the child in the face for touching his knee and his body, and the grandmother acted as a defense to prevent this, so he bit the grandmother's arm here, which is an incomprehensible excuse that the child's arm touched his body. In addition, he seems to have said that he has an anger control disorder. So, in fact, it's completely contrary to the attitude that can generally be seen when an event like this occurs, as if he doesn't admit his or her fault, so I don't really understand what the cause was in this part.

[Anchor]
It is known that the woman did not apologize properly to the victims along with the appearance of the crime, but in this case, how do you think it will affect her future sentencing?

[Jeongbin Seo]
When such a crime is committed in connection with sentencing, whether there is serious reflection on the crime afterwards and whether such an attitude is shown is a very important judgment factor, and the fact that no apology has been made so far can raise questions about whether he is really reflecting on the crime in this case. In addition, in cases like this, it is very important to reach an agreement with the victims, but since we are consistent with this attitude, I think it will be quite difficult to reach an agreement in future trials, and if so, these points are fully considered and there is a possibility that they can be punished a little more seriously than other issues.

[Anchor]
The victims are children and the elderly. Then, could they be punished under the Child Abuse Act or the Elderly Welfare Act?

[Jeongbin Seo]
First of all, since you are a child, both the Child Abuse Act and the crime of injury can be applied. Regarding the Welfare of the Elderly Act, in fact, the constituent requirements need to be considered a little more. However, anyway, given the seriousness of the current issue, it is expected that some serious punishment will be made regardless of whether such charges are specifically set for any crime.

[Anchor]
Let's change the topic and talk about something else. A little later this evening, the Seoul World Fireworks Festival will be held at Yeouido Hangang Park, and some seats were sold for a fee for the first time, and tickets appeared as soon as they came out again. Please explain this part.

[Jeongbin Seo]
At this festival, for the first time, 2,500 seats were sold for a fee, and the original purpose of the sale was to use this sale as an expense necessary for order. However, the problem is that when you sell paid seats like this, ticket sales are eventually prevalent and you are selling them with more money. The law that applies to the specific details of how to purchase and resell this ticket is slightly different. According to the current performance law, which has been in effect since March 2024, if you buy a ticket through a macro, that is, an automatic ticket purchase program, and sell it with more money, you can face up to a year in prison.

Therefore, if you sell tickets using macros at this festival now, you will be subject to the performance law. If you sell tickets purchased without machines or macros, you can be punished under the Misdemeanor Punishment Act, but in this case, the level of punishment is too low.
You may be fined up to 200,000 won.

[Anchor]
So, I think there will be a controversy over the effectiveness of the punishment. There are also opinions that the regulations need to be adjusted, so how do you see it?

[Jeongbin Seo]
Since the performance law only deals with the sale of tickets using specific macros, it is pointed out that it is impossible to punish damage caused by ticket sales that do not use macros, so the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission or the government recently said they would come up with measures. More specifically, even if you don't use a macro, the case of scalping tickets that are sold with more money will be subject to punishment. And they say they will prepare an amendment by raising the existing sentence a little. So I think these things will actually help prevent damage from scalping a little bit, and I think this legislation is also necessary.

[Anchor]
In addition, not only paid seats but also accommodation tickets for the so-called Myeongdang Hotel with a good view of the festival are being sold for more than money. Is punishment possible in this case?

[Jeongbin Seo]
In fact, to tell you the conclusion, punishment is difficult. In the case of such reservation tickets, since they are not tickets for performances, they are not subject to the Performance Act and are not subject to the Misdemeanor Punishment Act. For example, for example, if you buy products that are sold for a limited time and then sell them for a little more than a little more, those cases are actually almost similar, and it is difficult to punish all of these cases legally, and there are no regulations, so it is correct to think that there are no regulations that can punish these situations.

[Anchor]
When entering the seat at the Yeouido Fireworks Festival today, they will check their ID and thoroughly authenticate themselves. I think visitors should make a wise choice. You've been with lawyer Seo Jeong-bin. Thank you for talking today.