A man in his 70s who murdered his wife with a pre-prepared weapon and denied premediation in court, claiming that "the weapon was merely carried as a symbol of cutting away a marital relationship with a knife," has been handed a heavy prison sentence in his second trial.

The Seoul High Court's Criminal Division 11-1 (Presiding Judges Kim Tae-ho, Park Sun-young, and Kang Hyo-won) recently sentenced 75-year-old Defendant A, who was indicted on murder charges, to 18 years in prison, upholding the ruling of the first trial.

Defendant A was brought to trial on charges of visiting his spouse, B, at their child's home in September of last year and murdering her with a weapon he had brought in advance.

While acknowledging the murder itself, he appealed for leniency, claiming that the act was impulsive and accidental.

The first trial acknowledged the premeditated nature of the crime and sentenced him to 18 years in prison.

In the appellate trial, Defendant A and his defense counsel argued that the crime was not premeditated and that the sentence from the first trial was excessively severe.

During this process, they claimed, "The weapon was merely brought along as a symbol meaning to sever the marital relationship with a knife, and was not prepared as a crime tool."

They also argued along the lines of, "We could have prepared other tools that could more certainly guarantee death, but we did not, and therefore the weapon in question cannot be viewed as a tool for a crime."

The second trial dismissed the claims, stating, "It is difficult to readily accept the explanation that the weapon was brought as a symbol of a marital relationship, and considering the fact that the pre-prepared weapon was clearly used as the actual tool for the crime, the remaining arguments cannot be accepted either."

The court further ruled, "Considering factors such as the defendant murdering the victim—who was so precious to their children and family—at their residence without any special sense of guilt, and yet showing an attitude of shifting the responsibility for the crime onto the victim, the sentencing judgment of the first trial did not exceed the reasonable scope of discretion."

(Photo: Yonhap News)