[Yonhap]
[Yonhap]

Prosecutors have again sought a life sentence for a woman in her 50s convicted of killing her husband, a well-known real estate lecturer, as her appeal trial reached its final hearing.

At the closing arguments of the appeal before Suwon High Court's Criminal Division 3 — presided over by judges Cho Hyo-jeong, Ko Seok-beom and Choi Ji-won — on Thursday, prosecutors asked the court to impose a sentence "commensurate with the original sentencing demand," requesting life imprisonment and a 10-year electronic monitoring order.

The defendant, identified only as A, had denied intent to kill at her first trial but reversed course on appeal, acknowledging all charges. Her defense attorney said in closing arguments that A "has confessed to all criminal facts and is deeply remorseful," describing the killing as an impulsive act committed "in a traumatized state during a struggle with her spouse, when her emotions suddenly exploded."

The attorney added that A "absolutely did not commit murder out of financial desperation, as investigators claim," and said that while the victim's family had refused a settlement, A was "doing everything she can, including considering a criminal deposit to raise the funds."

In her own final statement, A said she "should have admitted everything and shown remorse at the first trial" but had not thought carefully about how her words would be received. "I have no right to go on living," she said, "but I will spend the rest of my days repenting for the sins I committed against my husband and his family."

A was indicted on charges of killing her husband, B, at their home in Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province, at around 3 a.m. on Feb. 15 last year. Investigators found that she had struck B repeatedly on the head with a liquor bottle as he lay on the living room floor, after a quarrel that erupted when he demanded a divorce while she already suspected him of having an affair. B had been a prominent real estate lecturer.

Last year, the SBS program "Geugeosi Algo Sipda," a TV investigative show, aired text messages B had exchanged with A while he was alive. In November 2024, B sent A a KakaoTalk message saying: "Honey, I feel so pitiful. I'm just a money-making machine. Why do I even earn money? If I die like this, that's it. I work every single day. I'm sick of myself. I've never played around, so I don't even know how."

The following month, he wrote: "Just let me have the 400 million won ($259,000) jeonse deposit back. I'll give you everything else. Let me live a little more comfortably." On Dec. 15, he added: "They say there's a life expectancy calculator. It says I have 1,000 days left. I'm going to live doing everything I want. It's a bit absurd, but I'm so sad." B had asked for a divorce on multiple occasions, but A refused each time.

The first-instance court sentenced A to 25 years in prison in January this year. The court rejected her claim that she had swung the bottle only to defend herself after B threatened her with a weapon, finding that she "knew that striking the head forcefully with a liquor bottle filled with alcohol and weighing about 2.7 kilograms could cause death, yet attacked him multiple times."

The court noted that a forensic medicine professor's advisory opinion and autopsy report indicated B had been struck on the head four to 10 or more times with the bottle. A witness who had been awake on the floor below testified to hearing "a hammering sound repeat 10 to 20 times from upstairs." The court concluded it could find that A "struck the victim multiple times with the bottle, causing his death, while he had already lost consciousness or was unable to resist," and dismissed her claims.

In explaining the sentence, the court cited the apparently impulsive nature of the crime, the "considerably brutal and inhumane" method, the victim's family's strong desire for punishment, and the defendant's tendency to make "hard-to-accept arguments rather than showing remorse." Both prosecutors and the defense subsequently appealed the sentence.

The appeal verdict is scheduled for 2 p.m. on July 16. The court is expected to weigh A's confession and change in attitude, the position of the victim's family, and the gravity of the crime in determining the final sentence.

Metadata fragment — omitted.


rainbow@heraldcorp.com