This article was displayed on the ChosunBiz RM Report site at 10:45 a.m. on Aug. 25, 2026.
A sergeant (in their 30s), the parent who was urgently arrested on suspicion of falsely closing reports including the disappearance of Jang Mi-ran (37) in Jeju, was released after a detention legality review.
It is considered unusual because the Jeju District Court's release order rate for arrest and detention legality reviews over the past five-plus years falls short of even half the national average. In legal circles, the view is that the release turned on whether the situation was urgent enough to arrest without a warrant, rather than on the substance of the allegations.
◇ Jeju District Court release rate 2.76%… below half the national average
According to the Monthly Court Statistics on the 25th, from 2021 through July this year, a total of 326 arrest and detention legality review cases were filed with the Jeju District Court. Of these, nine resulted in release orders, or 2.76% of filings. This is less than half the national ratio of 6.96%, calculated the same way.
By year, the Jeju District Court issued two release orders in 2021 and 2022, one in 2023, three in 2024, and one in 2025. There had been none through July this year. Although August statistics have not yet been released, if the Bu sergeant case is the first this month, it would be the first release order in about 11 months since September last year.
The Jeju District Court the previous day granted the arrest legality review requested by the Bu sergeant. Considering that the Bu sergeant's identity and whereabouts were continuously known and that there had been normal contact with investigators, the court found there were no urgent circumstances requiring immediate custody without an arrest warrant.
◇ Court: "No urgent circumstances to justify arrest without a warrant"
The court's decision is interpreted as examining whether police met the legal requirements for an emergency arrest, rather than the severity of the allegations against the Bu sergeant. While some say it is hard to accept the release given the public impact of Jang's disappearance case and others, the legal community's assessment is that the court pointed to procedural issues in the police's custody process.
Article 200-3 of the Criminal Procedure Act sets out the requirements for an emergency arrest. There must be reasonable grounds to suspect the suspect committed certain serious crimes. There also must be a risk of flight or destruction of evidence, and the situation must be so urgent that there is no time to obtain an arrest warrant. If even one of these requirements is not met, an emergency arrest cannot be made.
In Sept. 2006, the Supreme Court also held that an emergency arrest, as an exception to the warrant principle, is permitted only when all statutory requirements are met. An emergency arrest that fails to meet the requirements amounts to an unlawful arrest lacking legal basis.
Criminal defense attorney Oh Si-seong (Jeomseonmyeon Law Office) said, "Although the case has intense public attention and outrage, the court may have considered that the suspect is an incumbent police officer with a confirmed identity and residence and has remained in contact with investigators."
◇ "A warrant should have been obtained first"… assessment of allegations and need for detention is separate
Some also note that police should have applied in advance for an arrest warrant instead of making an emergency arrest. Kim Jeong-cheol, a top council member of the Reform Party and a former attorney and criminal law lecturer, said on Facebook the previous day, "This is a matter where an arrest warrant should have been obtained, and it is only natural to be released in a legality review when an officer who reported to work (without urgency) is emergency-arrested without a warrant."
Attorney Oh also said, "It is true that release orders are rare statistically, but in light of the emergency arrest requirements set by the Criminal Procedure Act, it appears more appropriate to have proceeded with arrest procedures pursuant to a warrant."
However, the court's decision to grant the arrest legality review is separate from whether to detain. The police the previous day applied for a detention warrant for the Bu sergeant, citing concerns about destruction of evidence and flight, and the Jeju District Prosecutors' Office sought the warrant from the court the same day. A pretrial warrant hearing for the Bu sergeant is scheduled for this afternoon.