On October 24, the SBS investigative program "Unanswered Questions" tracked down the truth behind the Gangseo torture murder case.
On the afternoon of June 20, an emergency call was received from a man pleading for help, stating that his live-in girlfriend was unconscious. Paramedics were dispatched to a semi-basement apartment in Gangseo-gu, Seoul, but the woman was already in cardiac arrest.
The deceased woman was Lim Jan-di, a 28-year-old employee at an IT company. However, suspicious marks were discovered on her body. There were bruises across her face and entire body, and her back bore traces of being struck multiple times with a blunt object.
Upon the arrival of the police, her boyfriend, Mr. Jeon, who is four years younger than her, admitted to the assault. He claimed that although he struck the victim multiple times using a rubber mallet, he had no intention to kill, asserting it was an accidental mistake that occurred on impulse because he could not tolerate the victim's lying.
However, autopsy results revealed that as many as 21 ribs were fractured, which led to the rupture of major internal organs. Forensic experts unanimously stated, "This is torture."
Furthermore, a home security camera installed in the house where the victim and perpetrator lived captured the shocking truth of the day of the incident. The perpetrator assaulted the victim 514 times over the course of 3 hours and 20 minutes. Even though the front door was located right behind where she was being assaulted, the victim was unable to resist even once or even dream of escaping, helplessly enduring the entire assault. What on earth had happened between them?
Colleagues of the victim testified that her daily life had changed noticeably starting a year earlier. The victim, who was known to be diligent and kind, began frequently leaving her seat during consultations from a year ago and was seen speaking on the phone with someone every day in the emergency staircase. In addition, abnormal signs such as bruises on her face and limping were observed, but it was revealed that she was unable to ask anyone for help.
Traces of violence indicated that the assault had begun at least six weeks prior. Despite sustaining severe injuries, the victim was presumed to have endured the pain using pain relief patches and painkillers. She also spoke on the phone daily with the perpetrator, Mr. Jeon, during which he reportedly repeated only his own words without listening to what she had to say.
The perpetrator insisted that he had no intention to kill. Even his parents went so far as to argue that it was the victim who had gaslighted him. The perpetrator also provoked public outrage with his reckless remark that he would apologize by supporting the bereaved family for the rest of his life.
Peers who remembered him described him as an obstinate individual who could not properly control his emotions. Meanwhile, acquaintances of the victim recalled that the couple looked less like romantic partners and more like a mother and son.
Many people also remembered the perpetrator as an uncomfortable presence who frequently caused altercations over trivial matters wherever he went.
The production team conducted forensic analysis on the victim's mobile phone, examining thousands of documents and audio files. Notably, they discovered records showing that the victim had turned to artificial intelligence multiple times to answer questions posed by the perpetrator. The victim had made desperate efforts to produce the answers he wanted to his riddle-like questions.
The production team also took note of the word "Gukpeu," which was repeatedly mentioned in the conversations between the two, and soon uncovered its true nature. What they called "Gukpeu" (a portmanteau for "national project") was the documenting and computerizing of mysterious frameworks for a fictional nation named "Tturi-guk," encompassing a legislature, judiciary, financial institutions, and digitalization.
However, drafting all these documents was entirely the victim's responsibility, while the perpetrator was in charge of coding for computerization. Yet, it drew attention that right up until the incident occurred, the perpetrator had not even been able to build a simple website.
The production team met with the perpetrator in person to ask about "Gukpeu." He stated, "Gukpeu is a set of rules agreed upon by the two of us. It was a rule made to fight less." However, the enforcement of these laws was carried out solely by the perpetrator.
The answer lay in the communication manual they had established.
There were chilling rules such as: "You must approach the truth yourself; judging that this manual alone will resolve everything means death. If you have started understanding but additional communication arrives, stop understanding, receive all the communication, and then begin understanding again. The use of a recording device to draft simple keywords is permitted for your own communication. The moment you choose falsehood, you will not receive any humane treatment whatsoever. Once punishment begins, no vindication or explanation is possible, and if I discover or perceive it myself, the punishment will be aggravated. Punishment is beyond anything you can imagine."
Amid the emergence of such bizarre evidence, the perpetrator went so far as to argue that he had been unable to receive psychiatric treatment due to a lack of money.
Regarding this, an expert pointed out, "The perpetrator was not assaulting the victim out of an emotional outburst. He was acting like a cat toying with a mouse rather than eating it. In a soft, gentle voice without significant emotional agitation, he assaulted the victim to a chilling degree."
In fact, on the day of the incident, the perpetrator mentioned death 16 times without once raising his voice. He also evoked horror by showing no agitation whatsoever even as the victim repeatedly pleaded in agony.
The expert analyzed the perpetrator, stating, "'I am an extraordinary person; I construct my world with that, derive satisfaction from it, and impose it on others. And if that is not fulfilled, I exert violence.' He exhibits narcissistic abuse, is a malignant narcissist, and has exploitative narcissism."
The expert added, "A malignant narcissist combines narcissism with antisocial personality traits. And at the foundation of a narcissist lies an inferiority complex," explaining that he controlled the victim to validate his sense of superiority: "By exerting control over the female victim, he wanted to feel that he was an extraordinary person."
Meanwhile, the perpetrator claimed that he was the actual victim, demanding 100 million won in compensation from her, labeling it a "project," and even defining her as a debtor. An expert pointed out that this was an extension of financial exploitation.
The expert also expressed deep regret, noting that the elaborately planned rules and the habitual violence that followed them over a prolonged period likely paralyzed the victim's judgment.
A legal expert analyzed, "The perpetrator's actions must be viewed as direct intent rather than conditional intent (dolus eventualis). A prison sentence ranging from 10 to 20 years is possible."
However, it left much to be desired that the indictment solely addressed the murder scene on the day of her death. Regarding this, the expert raised their voice, stating, "There are no provisions in South Korea's constitution or legal statutes for aggravated penalties regarding long-term control through gaslighting. South Korea is one of the most indolent nations in this regard. If the perpetrator's willful intent is not recognized, the issue is not just that he will be released soon, but that he will meet another woman."
(Editor Kim Hyo-jeong)
※
Copying, redistribution, and unauthorized use in AI training are strictly prohibited.