Man in His 70s Who Murdered Wife Claims Weapon Was Merely a "Symbolic Object"—What Was the Verdict?

A man in his 70s who murdered his wife sparked public outrage with an absurd claim during his appellate trial.

He argued that "the weapon was merely carried as a symbolic object representing the cutting away of a marital relationship with a knife," claiming it was not prepared for the crime.

The 75-year-old, identified as A, was indicted on charges of murdering his wife with a weapon in September of last year at their daughter's home in Goyang, Gyeonggi Province.

The day before the incident, the couple had argued over issues including the wife bringing a used plastic set of drawers into the home, prompting the wife to leave for their daughter's house.

The next day, A packed a weapon from home, headed to the daughter's house where his wife was staying, and swung the weapon at her.

Investigations showed that A slashed or stabbed his wife approximately 88 times.

Immediately after the crime, A called 119 himself to report that he "killed someone," and was reported to have stated during police questioning that he "had been thinking of killing her."

However, once the trial began, A claimed that it was an impulsive crime committed due to a momentary explosion of emotion.

The first-instance court ruled it a "premeditated murder," based on the fact that he brought the weapon in advance and his statements to the police, sentencing him to 18 years in prison along with an order for five years of probation following the completion of his sentence.

A appealed the verdict and made the following argument during the appellate trial regarding why he brought the weapon in advance:

He claimed that he "merely carried it as a symbolic object signifying the severing of the marital relationship with a knife, and did not prepare it as a crime tool," while also asserting that the weapon could not be regarded as a murder tool because "he could have prepared another tool that could more surely guarantee death, but did not do so."

The appellate court rejected the defendant's argument, stating, "It is difficult to accept the explanation that it was brought as a symbol of the marital relationship," and emphasizing that, above all, it was clear the pre-prepared weapon was used in the crime.

The court also pointed out that even after murdering a deeply cherished victim inside the home of their children and family members, A showed an attitude of shifting the responsibility for the crime onto the victim.

In the end, the appellate court upheld the original sentence of 18 years in prison, identical to the first trial.

Reported by Sim Yeong-gu | Video by Na Hong-hee | Graphics by Lee Jeong-ju | Produced by SBS Digital News
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.