Case Type: Assault (Prosecution Objection against Police Decision of Non-Remand) 

Result: Prosecution's Re-investigation Ordered and Suspect's Full Confession Secured

Case Details: 

1. Incident and Background 

The victim was waiting for a vehicle in an apartment parking lot in Gangnam-gu, Seoul, when the suspect approached with groundless complaints regarding double parking. The suspect used abusive language, aggressively shoved the victim's right shoulder, and raised a hand in a threatening manner to strike the victim. The victim immediately reported the incident to the 112 emergency line and blocked the suspect from fleeing the scene until law enforcement arrived.

2. Police Non-Remand Decision and Contradictions in Suspect's Statements 

Despite clear dashcam (black box) footage capturing the suspect forcefully shoving the victim, the Suseo Police Station issued a non-remand decision (no charges) on the grounds that the suspect lacked "intent to assault," accepting the suspect's excuse that it was merely minor physical contact while requesting to move a vehicle. In reality, the suspect altered his statement four times throughout the process: initially admitting to the police on-site that he shoved the victim out of anger, then claiming he merely touched the victim, then stating they just brushed past each other, and finally alleging he grabbed the victim while asking to move the car. The police concluded the investigation based solely on the suspect's final defense without verifying these inconsistencies.

3. Prosecution Objection and Legal Strategy 

The victim filed a formal objection to the prosecution, strictly challenging the legal requirements regarding the intent of assault based on Supreme Court precedents. According to Supreme Court Decision 2016Do9302 (decided October 27, 2016), the unlawfulness of an assault must be evaluated comprehensively by examining the purpose, circumstances, and nature of the act. Furthermore, lower court precedents, such as the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2023Gojoeng1926 (decided June 25, 2024), clearly dictate that even without a definitive intent to attack, the intent of assault is established if there is a willful negligence (recklessness) recognizing that one's actions exert physical force on another's body. Additionally, through an information disclosure request, the 112 police dispatch report was obtained, revealing that the suspect falsely claimed to the initial officers that he "only brushed against the victim's collar." This false statement was utilized to completely impeach the credibility of the suspect's defense when contrasted with the objective video evidence.

4. Final Disposition and Outcome 

Upon a meticulous review of the legal validity and evidence presented in the objection and legal briefs, the prosecution acknowledged the error in the initial police determination and ordered a formal re-investigation. Faced with the accumulated records of inconsistent statements and the definitive evidence of his initial false claim documented in the 112 report, the suspect ultimately confessed to all charges during the prosecution's interrogation. This case serves as a practical demonstration that even if the police issue a flawed initial disposition, the correct judicial outcome can still be achieved at the prosecution stage through rigorous legal analysis and strategic evidence gathering.

Case Inquiry: Attorney Min-hoo Kim