A husband who had been sentenced to life in prison on charges of murdering his wife for insurance money was found not guilty in a retrial held after his death behind bars. The court found that key evidence was collected unlawfully and said it was difficult to conclude the crash was intentional based solely on materials submitted by prosecutors.
The Criminal Division 1 of the Haenam Branch of the Gwangju District Court, presided over by Chief Judge Kim Seong-heum, acquitted the late a person surnamed Jang in a retrial on the 11th, saying there was no proof of the charges. The panel determined that some of the main evidence underpinning the original life sentence was collected without a warrant, violating due process.
Jang was indicted on charges of escaping alone after driving a truck off a junction in Uisin-myeon, Jindo-gun, South Jeolla, into Myeonggeum Reservoir (now Songjeong Reservoir) on July 9, 2003, and causing the death of his wife, 45 at the time, who was in the passenger seat. In 2005, his life sentence was finalized, and he had been serving his term.
At first, police referred the case for violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Settlement of Traffic Accidents, but prosecutors concluded Jang intentionally caused the crash to claim about 880 million won in insurance money and charged him with murder. Throughout the investigation and trial, Jang maintained it was a crash caused by drowsy driving and argued that some of the insurance policies were taken out by his wife after consulting an acquaintance, but the claims were rejected.
The retrial began when a police officer in South Chungcheong Province and retrial-specialist attorney Park Jun-young, asked by Jang's family in 2017, reexamined the case. In January 2024, the Supreme Court granted a retrial, and on the day a stay of execution of sentence was issued in April that year, Jang died of acute leukemia while serving life. He was 66.
The retrial panel determined it was difficult to deem the crash intentional based solely on the prosecution's evidence. The court said it was hard to prove the charges merely because the victim had taken out multiple insurance policies.
Normally, when a defendant dies, proceedings end with no right of prosecution, but in this case the retrial continued in the form of a trial in absentia even after death. If prosecutors appeal the ruling, the case could be heard again on appeal.