Jang Yoon-gi’s Handwritten Statement Revealed: “Hope Disclosure of My Personal Information Doesn't Harm My Family... My Dream Is to Become a Police Officer”
Police Decided to Disclose Personal Information on May 8
Disclosure Delayed by Five Days Due to Jang Yoon-gi's Refusal to Consent
Public outrage is mounting as it has been reported that Jang Yoon-gi, the "Gwangju high school student murderer," submitted a handwritten statement during the review process regarding the disclosure of his personal information.
According to a report by Channel A on July 17, Jang Yoon-gi submitted a handwritten statement to the police information disclosure review committee, in which he said, "I am sorry for committing the crime." However, he added, "Even if my personal information is disclosed, I hope that it does not cause any harm to my mother, father, or older brother." There is growing public anger over the fact that while Jang Yoon-gi drove the bereaved family of the 17-year-old victim, Lee, to tears of blood, he was instead concerned about the disadvantages that might affect his own parents and brother.
Previously, on May 8, the police decided to disclose Jang Yoon-gi's personal information; however, as Jang did not consent, there was a five-day grace period, and the information was posted on May 14.
It has also been reported that during a psychological evaluation conducted by the prosecution, Jang Yoon-gi expressed his desire to become a police officer like his father.
On May 5, Jang Yoon-gi murdered Lee and also attacked a 17-year-old male high school student who approached the crime scene with a weapon. The bereaved family is pleading for the maximum penalty to be imposed on Jang Yoon-gi. On July 13, Lee's mother appealed to the court to "sentence to death this demon-like individual who took away my daughter's precious life and completely destroyed our family's lives."
Although Jang Yoon-gi had consistently claimed that "I didn't know the victim was female," insisting it was an impulsive killing, he admitted to a sexually motivated murder during the second trial on July 13. Now that Jang Yoon-gi has admitted to committing murder for the purpose of sexual assault, the prosecution plans to focus on proving Jang's charges using evidence such as the damaged sex doll, cable ties for bondage, dashcam footage filmed on the day of the incident, and the defendant's cross-examination.
Additionally, both the prosecution and police are simultaneously investigating allegations that the Gwangsan Police Station's investigative team in Gwangju either omitted or destroyed key evidence—such as the sex doll and cable ties—which could have proven the murder was sexually motivated, and also leaked investigative developments to Jang Yoon-gi's father, Superintendent Jang, a current police officer.
On July 16, the Special Investigation Team for the Jang Yoon-gi Murder Case at the National Office of Investigation filed a pre-arrest warrant for Commissioner A, the former head of criminal affairs at Gwangsan Police Station, on charges of abuse of authority and dereliction of duty. The special investigation team believes that Commissioner A, while directing the investigation of Jang Yoon-gi's case, had the authority to apply charges of rape and murder, but instead influenced the entire process to classify it as a general murder.
Hot Picks Today
"Please Teach Us the Technology"—Korea Once Sought Help from Japan... Now Threatens the Origin Country After 65 Years [Advance of K-Ramen]①
- Half-Year Salary Hits 184 Million Won—Not Samsung or SK hynix: Which Company Tops Pay Rankings?
- U.S.-Iran Retaliatory Escalation Intensifies: "Total Annihilation If Attacked Again" Heightens War Fears
- Born in 1990 With White Hair?..."Is It Dye or Gray Hair?" Spotlight on Yong Hyein's Bangs
- "Acting for 60 Seconds Earns 52 Million Won"... The True Identity of the Drama Protagonist Who Took Jobs from Actors
The special investigation team also referred Inspector B, the former head of the violent crimes team in charge of the Jang Yoon-gi case at the time, for arrest on charges of evidence concealment, abuse of authority, and dereliction of duty. Investigator B failed to secure key evidence—including the sex doll and cable ties—that could support the motive of a sexually motivated crime and restricted the direction of the investigation by saying, "Don't frame it as a sexual crime." It was reported that, during the investigation, Inspector B testified to the effect that "there were orders from higher-ups."
© The Asia Business Daily. All rights reserved. Unauthorized AI training and use prohibited.