A 70-year-old man accused of killing his wife, mistakenly believing she was trying to forcibly admit him to a mental hospital, has been sentenced to a heavy prison term. The Supreme Court’s Second Division (Presiding Justice Park Young-jae) recently upheld the lower court’s ruling of 18 years in prison during the final appeal of A (77), who was indicted for murder.
A was referred to trial for fatally stabbing his wife, B, multiple times with a weapon at their home in Gunsan, North Jeolla Province, last September. According to the investigation, A became enraged after overhearing his son’s phone call to B via speakerphone, in which the son suggested, “Let’s send Father to a nursing hospital for mental health treatment,” and decided to commit the crime. A had experienced a business failure many years ago and received treatment in 2020 after being diagnosed with a mild depressive episode, a type of depressive disorder.
Around the time of the crime, A repeatedly told his family he planned to start a “transparent flowerpot business related to people with disabilities.” The family reportedly judged his business plan unrealistic and believed he showed symptoms of delusions of grandeur and obsession, leading them to discuss psychiatric treatment or admission to a nursing hospital. However, contrary to A’s claim that they tried to “forcibly admit him,” B had insisted, “I cannot send my husband to a mental hospital,” advocating instead for nursing hospital treatment. The son also came from another region to accompany his father for medical consultations, with no evidence of immoral behavior.
The court of first instance stated, “The defendant attacked the victim, with whom he had lived for over 50 years, leading to her death, and the children are suffering severe psychological trauma and emotional turmoil,” sentencing him to 18 years in prison. The second trial upheld this decision. The court noted, “Due to A’s pathological obsession with his business and other difficult-to-understand actions, the family had made a psychiatric appointment. While these symptoms may have influenced the motive for the crime, the victim likely endured extreme physical and mental suffering before her death.”
Although A appealed, arguing diminished mental capacity, the Supreme Court dismissed it, stating, “Considering A’s age, character, relationship with the victim, and the motive, means, and consequences of the crime, the lower court’s sentence of 18 years in prison is not unjust.”
