Woman in Her 50s Sentenced to Reduced Jail Term on Appeal for Killing Husband, a Prominent Real Estate Instructor

First Trial: 25 Years in Prison

Appeal: Sentence Reduced to 22 Years

Court Cites Confession and Restitution to Victims

A woman in her 50s, accused of killing her husband, a well-known real estate “star instructor,” during a marital dispute, has had her sentence reduced on appeal.

On July 16, the Suwon High Court’s Criminal Division 3 (Presiding Judges Cho Hyojeong, Ko Seokbeom, and Choi Jiwon) overturned the original sentence of 25 years in prison and instead sentenced the defendant, identified as A, to 22 years in prison in the appeal trial for murder charges.

Exterior view of Suwon District Court and Suwon High Court. Photo by Yonhap News Agency

A was put on trial for fatally striking her husband, B, multiple times in the head with a blunt object while he was lying on the floor of their apartment living room in Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province, around 3 a.m. on February 15 last year. Investigations revealed she committed the crime in a fit of rage after a serious argument with her husband, who had demanded a divorce and whom she suspected of infidelity. B was known for his work as a star real estate instructor.

During the first trial, A claimed, “My husband threatened me with a weapon, and I acted impulsively.” However, in the appeals trial, she changed her stance and admitted to all charges.

The appeals court stated, “As a married couple, there is a duty to support, cooperate with, and protect each other. But given the motive, the area of attack, and the number of blows, the defendant’s culpability is extremely serious.” The court added, “The pain the victim must have experienced in the course of his senseless death, as well as the severe emotional suffering of the bereaved family, would have been considerable.” It further pointed out, “The defendant repeatedly offered excuses and denied intent to kill throughout the initial trial, and not long after being released, she withdrew hundreds of millions of won from her own account, only taking care of her own interests, so strict punishment is unavoidable.”

Regarding A’s claim for a sentencing reduction on the grounds of voluntary surrender, as she immediately reported the crime to emergency services (112), the court stated, “Although she did report the incident to the authorities, she continued to deny intent to kill. Therefore, even if her actions were considered a voluntary surrender, the lower court’s decision not to reduce the sentence was valid.”

However, the court explained its decision to reduce the sentence by stating, “The defendant fully confessed to her crimes at this court and has shown remorse. She appears to have acted impulsively after consuming a considerable amount of alcohol at the time of the crime. Additionally, she deposited a certain amount with the court for the bereaved family. Taking all these sentencing factors into holistic consideration, the original sentence was excessively heavy and therefore unjust.”

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.