[Editor Kim Hyo-jung] Similar cases, yet drastically different endings: Why?
On the August 15 broadcast of SBS "Unanswered Questions", the program tracked the cases of two sexual violence victims.
At 3:00 a.m. on February 21, an emergency call was received by 119 in Ansan, Gyeonggi Province. A woman's voice stated that she no longer had the will to live and would make an extreme choice.
Danbi, a 20-year-old who dreamed of becoming a police officer, left a final farewell to her mother and jumped from a side where there was no air mat, leading to her death.
The sudden death of her daughter. It was later revealed that she had reported being sexually assaulted by the owner of the pub where she worked part-time, and that a decision not to send the case to prosecution had been made shortly before her death.
Around 4:00 a.m. on December 28 of last year, a staff gathering began at the pub where Danbi worked. Afterward, the other employees left early, leaving Danbi alone with the owner in his 40s. Danbi claimed that the owner then dragged her to a CCTV blind spot and sexually assaulted her.
However, two months later, the police decided not to send the case forward due to a lack of charges. The police judged that Danbi was not in a state of being unable to resist based on her appearance captured on CCTV, and that they had sexual relations by mutual agreement.
Danbi, who confessed to the sexual assault to a friend immediately after leaving the pub, went to report it with her friend afterward and even visited an obstetrics and gynecology clinic for an examination.
Yet, the police based their decision on the footage showing Danbi leaving the pub with a smile and the skinship between the two prior to the sexual relations, concluding there was consent. In particular, the quasi-rape charge filed by Danbi applies when a victim is unconscious, but the police judged that Danbi's state was not one of mental loss.
In response, the bereaved family pointed out that Danbi's medical records were omitted during the investigation process. They noted that Danbi was taking psychiatric medication for depression and other issues at the time.
An expert stated that when psychiatric medication and alcohol are consumed together, their interaction amplifies, which can paralyze judgment capabilities.
Another expert expressed regret, saying, "They concluded that it was difficult to recognize and take advantage of the victim's state of mental loss based on pre-encounter skinship and statements from companions. However, a process to verify whether the perpetrator's claims were true should have been carried out."
The expert added, "Since the two were in an employment relationship, the crime of rape by taking advantage of influence could have been thoroughly reviewed. Instead of dismissing it as not guilty right away, they should have examined whether a crime was established," noting that the police seemed to have made a hasty judgment.
In particular, the expert pointed out that taking the victim's statement while she was heavily intoxicated was the sole basis used, which was also regrettable.
Another victim, Jeong Yeon-su, stated she suffered group sexual assault when she was in her third year of middle school. After becoming an adult, she suffered extreme distress from the circulation of her victimization video and mustered the courage to file a complaint against the perpetrators.
However, the police decided not to send the case, citing the expiration of the statute of limitations for the assault and insufficient evidence for the sexual assault.
Later, Yeon-su gathered evidence on her own. Thanks to her efforts to publicize the issue and actively collect evidence, the prosecution ordered a reinvestigation of the case, which ultimately led to all perpetrators being found guilty and receiving prison sentences.
An expert commented on this, stating, "It is undeniable that the prosecution's supplementary investigation is like salvation or a light saving a life for a victim. Our constitution states that the state has an obligation to protect citizens from dangers such as crime and disasters. Yet, a victim has to go around finding, proving, and clarifying evidence directly? That is a contradiction," pointing out institutional limitations.
Experts expressed regret over the police's judgment in Danbi's case. In doing so, they spoke about the limitations of police investigation departments and expressed sorrow over the reality that the quality of investigations inevitably drops due to heavy workloads driven by understaffing.
The recently implemented amendment to the Criminal Procedure Act was enacted based on a national consensus that abuse of authority by the prosecution must be prevented, following controversies over prosecutorial overreach.
However, voices of concern are also growing regarding the concentration of investigative authority exclusively in the police, bypassing the positive functions of prosecutorial investigations.
Accordingly, the broadcast emphasized that real improvements in victim protection following such legal amendments are necessary, stating, "We hope measures will be devised to minimize the side effects that may arise if a single agency monopolizes investigations."
In particular, they expressed hope that measures such as increasing police personnel and relieving operational stress would definitely be implemented as one of those solutions.
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.