[News UP] Active Officer Who Damaged Fellow Body Dreamed of 'Complete Crime'

■ Host: anchor Cho Jin-hyuk
■ Starring: Oh Yoon-sung, professor of police administration at Soonchunhyang University

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

[Anchor]
I'll solve it from the perspective of major incident accidents and criminology. With Oh Yoon-sung, a professor of police administration at Soonchunhyang University. Please come in.

[Yoon Sung Oh]
Hello,

[Anchor]
First, let's look at the case of an active officer who killed a fellow military officer and abandoned his body. I told you in detail in the report earlier, but it seems that there have been various active concealment activities, such as manipulating the victim's mobile phone. Can you say you dreamed of a complete crime?

[Yoon Sung Oh]
The motive for the crime is under investigation. However, the key person in this case is Mr. A, who is scheduled to be promoted to lieutenant colonel, and the victim is Mr. B, a fixed-term military officer. At 15:00 on October 25, the victim, who was working at the same unit office, was strangled to death inside his vehicle after an argument in the unit parking lot in Gwacheon, Gyeonggi-do. About six hours later, the body was taken to a construction site near the unit and damaged the body.

At 9:41 p.m. on the 26th of the next day, he abandoned his body with stones near the Bukhangang River in Hwacheon, Gangwon-do, where he worked 10 years ago. A week later, on November 2, some of the bodies were found 300 meters downstream of Hwacheon Bridge, and police launched an investigation. We found a vinyl handle containing eight non-perishable parts. And the next day, on November 3, the suspect was urgently arrested near Ilwon Station.

It may be accidental to say that this is the motive of the crime, but I think that this is a very planned, intelligent, and complete crime. The reason is that using the victim's cell phone, this person is supposed to come out on a fixed-term basis until October 30th as if he were alive. So he sent a message asking for a vacation treatment with three or four days left before his contract expires.

And while carrying the victim's mobile phone, he responded to survival by turning off the victim's mobile phone and turning it on, and even not going to work to the victim's family and acquaintances. It can be seen as a highly premeditated crime if you try to cover up the crime by sending a message asking how you are, but you see that you worked calmly at your new workplace until the 28th when you were caught.

[Anchor]
He seemed to have moved very actively to determine the criminal record, but on the day of the arrest, there was no resistance with desperation. Why did this do that?

[Yoon Sung Oh]
The reason is that even though he used his head like that, he must have been quite anxious since at least seeing the report that the victim's body was found. But when the investigator appeared right in front of him, he completely collapsed psychologically at that moment.

[Anchor]
So how did the investigation happen so quickly when you caught the suspect in a day as soon as the body was found?

[Yoon Sung Oh]
In fact, the fingerprint of suspect A is secured immediately from the tape that wrapped the body that was reported. And there was DNA as well as the suspect's fingerprints. And looking at the phone call details and all of these between the two people, we were able to analyze the CCTV at the scene and identify this person as a suspect.

[Anchor]
We were able to catch the suspect in an instant thanks to a scientific investigation, but of course, there's still a lot more to be revealed.What can Ma think about it?

[Yoon Sung Oh]
In the case of a possible scenario, it can be seen as whether the motive for the crime is desire, money, or corruption. What I'm paying attention to is that October 25th, when the incident occurred, was a Friday weekday. And at that time, if it's 3 p.m., it's working hours.

If the statement that they killed in outrage while talking in the car of the unit where they worked during working hours is clear, this person is now promoted. And in the situation of going to a high-ranking position, he must be aware of the fact that if this person commits a murder, it is 100% against him, but he also killed during working hours in the parking lot of the unit where he works. The timing of this is quite important.

This person is being promoted and transferred to another unit. Also, in the case of the victim, it's not a situation where the two of them break up at the time their contract expires on October 30. In that sense, it is reasonable to assume that such a crime occurred in such a situation where the two have different opinions on whether to continue their relationship.

[Anchor]
I asked you about this part because the motive of the crime is an important reason for sentencing, but this part is expected to be revealed a little more through the investigation. What do you think of the possibility that the crime was planned in advance now?

[Yoon Sung Oh]
I don't think there is a possibility that the crime was planned in advance. The reason is that the body was damaged now, about six hours later, in a planned demolition area near the unit where he was working. If so, if the crime was originally planned, would it be possible to kill in broad daylight, which is also working hours, in the parking lot of the unit where he works? However, the process of disposing of or damaging the body after killing the victim seems to have been thoroughly planned, but it seems unlikely that the murder was planned from the beginning.

[Anchor]
The professor personally assumes that the crime itself is accidental, and how do you predict whether or not to disclose your personal information?

[Yoon Sung Oh]
There are four conditions for personal information disclosure by the Special Lecture Act. The first is a specific violent crime where the means are cruel and serious damage has occurred. It also guarantees public interests such as the people's right to know, prevention of recidivism, and crime prevention. There's also some agreement here. And there is evidence to believe that the suspect committed the crime. This is because you've already confessed.

Also, since the suspect is not a juvenile, there seems to be no reason not to disclose this, except that this person is an active officer currently working at the Cyber Operations Command. I don't know if these things are considered, but if not, it doesn't seem that difficult to disclose personal information.

[Anchor]
We've heard the prospects of what will happen in the future. Let's move on quickly to the next case. An eight-car crash occurred in Gangnam, and now a total of 11 people are injured, which is a little ridiculous. Can you give me an overview of what's going on?

[Yoon Sung Oh]
It's around 1 p.m. on the 2nd. A woman in her 30s who was carrying a 4-year-old child in a stroller on a side road in Geoyeo-dong, Songpa-gu, Seoul, and a woman in her 20s crashed while driving. He said he would go to the police station and ran away from the scene. About 40 minutes later, around 1:39 p.m., an eight-car collision occurred on Teheran-ro in the direction of Gangnam Station at the intersection of Kukkiwon's entrance in Yeoksam-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul. As a result, 7 vehicles and 1 motorcycle were damaged and a total of 9 people were slightly injured. In the case of this woman, she didn't stop after the crash, hit the flower bed and drove backwards, or she lasted 40 minutes without getting out of the car after the police were dispatched, and the police said she had no license at all under the Special Price Act. And he was arrested as a current offender on charges of violating the Special Act on Traffic Accidents and is currently in custody.

[Anchor]
Actually, I drove, but I couldn't get my license, so when my mother said she would take the car out, she even discouraged me to take a taxi. But the key is that the suspect took non-narcotic tranquilizers. How will this part work in the future?

[Yoon Sung Oh]
I went to an academy, but I couldn't get a license. That doesn't mean much. I don't have a driver's license. And especially because he said he took tranquilizers, the police have now requested a detailed examination from the National Forensic Service. In addition, in the case of mothers, we can talk about whether there is a charge of assistance by telling them to take a taxi, but in reality, it seems a little unreasonable to apply the charge of assistance, and at least they will not be able to avoid moral criticism. Because in that situation, you should have reported it to the police.

[Anchor]
And let's move on. There is a remarkable ruling from the Supreme Court now, and five years ago, an elementary school teacher was punished for child abuse for pulling the arm of a second-grade elementary school child, and the court case was destroyed. Where did the Supreme Court focus?

[Oyunseong]
In 2022, the elementary school teacher was charged with child abuse, and what happened at that time was that the child was in the second grade, and he was told to stand up by dragging his arm because he did not participate properly in class and did not go to eat, and the first and second trials sentenced him to a fine of 1 million won for physical abuse, saying that it was possible to discipline him through dialogue or other means.

However, this time, the Supreme Court educated students according to the law. Therefore, if this act is not a legally prohibited corporal punishment, it should be viewed as an educational act, even if it involves some physical force. That's what I said. In fact, it will be the first judgment of the Supreme Court that educational practices conducted within the legal scope cannot be regarded as physical abuse even if physical force is involved.

[Anchor]
It is known that the legal standards of child abuse are very ambiguous, so if it is for the purpose of discipline, it is not emotional abuse. Can you explain the criteria?

[Yoon Sung Oh]
Now, the National Police Agency is presenting what is called the guidelines for judging child abuse and discipline at home and in schools. If you look at it there, repeated comments that could shame you in a public place or one slap in the face in anger, this is considered to be a multi-problem abuse. For things like physical coercion for safety, the doctor of discipline is considered legitimate. Also, it is said that it is not a child abuse that has been announced in advance to prevent students from leaving the classroom if they do not listen.In fact, it is pointed out that the standard is quite ambiguous because it is a case-by-case.

[Anchor]
Detailed guidelines will also be needed for the scope of application and this. That's all I have to say. I was with Oh Yoon-sung, a professor of police administration at Soonchunhyang University. Thank you.