A woman in her 30s who was indicted and sentenced to a heavy sentence in the first and second trials for allegedly killing her husband through nicotine poisoning was acquitted in the final retrial.
According to the legal community on the 7th, the Supreme Court (chief judge Kim Sang-hwan) upheld the lower court's ruling, which acquitted A on murder charges on Dec. 24 of last year. A was indicted on charges of administering her husband lethal doses of nicotine in misu powder, white porridge, and cold water three times on May 26-27, 2021, leading to his death.
The husband ate the food given by A on the 26th and complained of stomach pain and chest discomfort, visiting the emergency room that night. The police believed he died at around 3 a.m. on the 27th after consuming cold water and white porridge provided by A at around 1:30 to 2 a.m. after returning home.
The first trial court stated, “The cause of death of the victim was revealed to be acute nicotine poisoning, and symptoms such as nausea and chest pain after consuming white porridge could be considered typical symptoms of nicotine poisoning,” adding, “The defendant asked for additional nicotine stock when purchasing liquid nicotine, was aware of the lethal risk, and considering the circumstances before and after the victim's death, the possibility of a third-party murder is slim,” and sentenced A to 30 years in prison.
The second trial court also acknowledged guilt for only the crime involving cold water but maintained the sentence.
However, the Supreme Court in July 2023 overturned the lower court’s ruling and remanded the case to the Suwon High Court, stating, “It cannot be concluded that the charges have been proven.” The Supreme Court noted, “The circumstantial evidence presented for the guilty part is not sufficient as active evidence backing the charges, and there remain doubts that prevent a conviction,” and acknowledged the possibility of further investigation.
Consequently, the Suwon High Court retrial panel delivered a not guilty verdict after four deliberations, stating, “Given the preparation and execution process of the crime, the reasonableness of choosing such a method, the risk of detection, the likelihood of the victim consuming the substances, and the intervention of alternative actions such as the victim’s suicide, there remains reasonable doubt. It is determined that the crime is not proven.”
The prosecution appealed the retrial verdict, but the Supreme Court did not accept it. The Supreme Court outlined the reason for dismissing the appeal by stating, “Upon reviewing the reasoning of the lower court’s judgment in light of related legal principles and records, there appears to be no breach of logical and empirical rules exceeding the bounds of free evaluation of evidence or misinterpretation of laws concerning the establishment of murder and binding force of the remand judgment.”