KB News Desk
Lawmakers seek change after defendant’s father was exempted from criminal charges
Lawmakers are seeking legislative changes to limit an exemption of liability for relatives of criminal suspects who harbor offenders and tamper with evidence in the wake of a Gwangju murder case in which the suspect’s father, a police officer, allegedly tampered with evidence.
On Wednesday, Democratic Party of Korea Rep. Kim Dong-ah and nine other lawmakers proposed a bill to amend the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes.
The proposal would add a new article, 14-2, stating that “a judge, prosecutor or public official engaged in criminal investigations who commits an offense as stipulated in Article 151 or 155 of the Criminal Act must face punishment and cannot qualify for the exemption for relatives.”
Article 151 of the Criminal Act criminalizes concealing an offender or helping an offender evade capture, while Article 155 covers destroying, concealing, forging or altering evidence in another person’s criminal or disciplinary case.
The sticking point is that both provisions exempt relatives or cohabiting family members who commit such acts on the offender’s behalf.
The move comes after alleged irregularities involving the defendant’s family emerged during the investigation of the Gwangju murder case.
Jang Yoon-gi, 23, is accused of abducting and killing a high school girl he did not know in Gwangju on May 5 and of attempting to kill another teenager.
During the investigation, Jang’s father, a serving police officer, was found to have destroyed or disposed of key evidence linked to his son’s alleged crime, including a damaged sex doll and an old mobile phone.
However, under the exemption for relatives in Article 155, the father was not charged with evidence tampering.
“A public official responsible for criminal investigations and tasked with protecting people’s lives and safety commits a serious offense that gravely undermines the judicial order when the official instead abuses their authority and investigative expertise to conceal a serious crime,” the proposed bill says.
“There are concerns that applying the same exemption when public officials engaged in criminal investigations use their positions, authority or access to evidence to destroy, conceal, forge or alter evidence could impede the proper exercise of the state’s authority to punish crimes and undermine public trust in the criminal justice system,” it says.
This is not the first bill to be proposed in relation to the case. Three-term Democratic Party lawmaker Rep. So Byung-hoon proposed a similar bill on Tuesday, stating that public officials who interfere with evidence should face punishment and should not qualify for the exemption for relatives.
Calls for reform were not restricted to the Democratic Party. People Power Party Rep. Yoo Sang-bum proposed a bill on July 14 to revise Articles 151 and 155. The bill would prevent the exemption for relatives from applying when criminal investigators use their official positions, authority, information or professional expertise to commit offenses such as harboring an offender or tampering with evidence.
