A mother in her 20s who gave birth to a baby in a commercial building restroom and abandoned the infant in a trash can has been sentenced to prison in the first trial.

The baby narrowly escaped death.

The Seoul Central District Court's Criminal Division 29 (Presiding Judge Eom Gi-pyo) sentenced a woman surnamed Kim, who was indicted and detained on charges of violating the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment of Child Abuse (attempted child abuse murder), to two years in prison and ordered the completion of 40 hours of child abuse treatment programs.

Kim was indicted on charges of giving birth to a child in a commercial building restroom where she worked on April 3 and subsequently abandoning the baby in a trash can.

The baby was discovered by one of Kim's coworkers and rushed to the hospital in cardiac arrest. After receiving emergency treatment, including CPR, and recovering, the infant received intensive care in the neonatal intensive care unit.

The court stated, "Although the defendant may have panicked during the sudden childbirth process, placing a newborn infant, who lacked the ability to breathe independently, into a trash can and covering it with tissue paper leaves no choice but to conclude that there was an intent, even if conditional, to abandon and kill the victimized child."

The court explained the sentencing rationale by adding, "There appear to be no grounds for mitigation due to mental or physical disability or incapacity on the part of the defendant."

The court remarked, "We even deliberated on the constitutionality of the relevant provisions, questioning whether it is appropriate to impose excessive criminal punishment on a mother who panicked immediately after an unexpected childbirth."

Recently, the issue of constitutionality came under judicial review after a foreign exchange student mother, indicted on charges of neglecting a newborn to death, requested a constitutional review of the crime of child abuse murder during her appellate trial.

The court noted that consideration must be given to the background behind the abolition of Article 251 of the Criminal Act, which previously punished infanticide more lightly than ordinary murder.

It explained that the abolition of the infanticide crime was intended to strengthen the state's penal power in response to criticisms that it underestimated the right to life of infants.

Furthermore, considering the intent behind the Constitutional Court's ruling last year upholding the constitutionality of the crime of child abuse resulting in death, the court interpreted that the crime of child abuse murder, which carries a heavier penalty than child abuse resulting in death, is also constitutional under the current state.

The court judged, "While it is true that there are shortcomings in support and relief measures for mothers in crisis, from the perspective of the judiciary, which is not responsible for administrative support procedures, it is not appropriate to lower the level of punishment simply because support is insufficient."

The stance is that punishment is inevitable even for a mother in a crisis situation if she chooses not to utilize social relief systems and attempts to harm her child's life.

However, the court explained that the sentence was determined by applying reductions for an attempted crime and extenuating circumstances.

The court told Kim, "In the appellate trial, you may once again argue the circumstances at the time, including the constitutionality of the applied laws."