The May 30th episode of SBS Unanswered questions examined the controversial overturning of a ruling in the infamous charcoal exorcism death case.
On September 18, 2024, a gruesome death occurred at a restaurant in Incheon. A group of perpetrators tied a woman in her thirties to a steel structure and lit charcoal briquettes underneath her, ultimately causing her death.
What made the case even more shocking was the fact that the perpetrators were members of the victim’s family, including her aunt, identified as Kim, and Kim’s children.
Kim, who worked as a shaman, performed what she described as an exorcism ritual alongside her children and followers. During the ritual, the victim suffered severe third-degree burns covering approximately 25 percent of his body and later died from his injuries.
In the first trial, the court sentenced Kim to life in prison and imposed prison terms of more than 20 years on his accomplices. The victim’s biological brother, who knew about the plan but did not intervene, was sentenced to 10 years in prison for aiding and abetting the crime.
However, a dramatic turnaround occurred during the appeal process in April. The court changed the charge from murder to causing bodily harm, reducing Kim’s sentence to seven years. The appeals court found that the perpetrators neither intended nor planned to kill the victim and could not have foreseen his death. The decision sparked public outrage, especially since six accomplices received suspended sentences.
During the trial, Kim claimed that the victim had been possessed by evil spirits since second grade and insisted that the ritual be conducted to save her. Kim further claimed that the victim had been in a romantic relationship with her father and brother in a previous life and had even carried a knife with her with the intention of killing her mother. Based on these beliefs, Kim proposed the charcoal exorcism ritual and the victim would agree to participate voluntarily. The Court of Appeal paid particular attention to this topic.
The first court found that the crime exceeded any act of ordinary harm once the victim began asking to be released from his chains but was ignored. According to the ruling, the offenders even put hot coal in her mouth and gagged her. However, the appeals court concluded that the situation was not particularly dangerous during the first hour and eleven minutes of the ritual.
Kim reportedly grabbed the victim by the hair, slapped her repeatedly, and brought the charcoal fire pit closer to her body. The victim was subsequently stripped naked and exposed directly to heat. Despite her desperate cries of pain, no one present attempted to help her.
The perpetrators further stated that the victim was possessed by a lustful spirit and directed intense heat towards her genital area. The ritual continued for two hours and fifty-one minutes before it was finally interrupted. After lowering the victim from the frame, the group poured cold water on him and attempted artificial respiration and CPR, but never called emergency services.
Instead, they spent nearly two hours dismantling the steel structure and cleaning up the scene. The first court considered these actions as evidence of an attempt to conceal the crime, upholding the murder conviction. However, the appeals court ruled that the delayed emergency report alone was not sufficient to prove intent to kill or a conspiracy to commit murder. It also concluded that false statements about how the burns occurred may have been made out of panic.
The first court also relied on the testimony of the victim’s brother and cousin, who stated that the perpetrators of the crime were aware of the dangers involved. The appeals court disagreed, ruling that awareness of the risk did not necessarily demonstrate a murder plan and that it was difficult to conclude that the perpetrators had foreseen the victim’s death.
An expert interviewed on the program argued that the key difference between the two sentences lay in how Kim was perceived. “The first court found Kim to be a malicious person, while the appeals court found that she genuinely cared for her granddaughter and was performing the ritual for her benefit,” the expert explained.
Another expert criticized the appellate ruling for rejecting much of the first court’s reasoning. “The lower court considered financial motivations as part of the motive for the murder, but the appeals court rejected that conclusion,” the expert said. Although the appeals court ruled that Kim herself was not experiencing financial difficulties, many of her accomplices reportedly had significant debts and were struggling financially. The expert suggested that their financial situation could be the result of manipulation or exploitation.
Evidence presented in the program indicated that Kim’s children and followers had been subjected to considerable pressure while helping to repay his debts.
The production team also conducted an experiment to determine whether offenders would recognize the danger of their actions. A doctor who examined the circumstances stated: “Anyone at the scene would have understood the risks. Medically, it was clearly an environment capable of causing death.”
A legal expert, however, argued that it may have been difficult for ordinary people to fully understand the severity of the heat, pointing out that it would not necessarily have been obvious that the steel frame had become too hot to touch.
The program further examined Kim’s background. According to those interviewed, she would have changed radically after undergoing a spiritual initiation after marriage. Family members would become little more than extensions of his will, as Kim continually exploited his children. Some of them reportedly attempted to escape his influence.
One behavioral expert described Kim as a person who considered himself omnipotent. “He seems to have no fear or guilt,” the expert said. “Financial motives are hidden beneath the surface. He probably couldn’t tolerate someone refusing to act on his wishes. This would have seriously damaged his self-esteem.”
The expert added that punishing the victim may have been necessary in Kim’s mind because allowing resistance might encourage others to stop obeying his authority.
The same expert suggested that while Kim may not have begun the ritual with the specific intention to kill, the intense anger that drove the act may have increased throughout the ordeal.
Another expert questioned the appeals court’s decision to divide the crime into three separate phases, arguing that at some point during the ritual the perpetrators must have developed at least a conditional intent to kill. The expert said it was difficult to understand why the original murder conviction had been overturned.
Another specialist also criticized the ruling, warning that classifying such extreme behavior as fatal bodily harm rather than murder could set a dangerous precedent.
The case has now gone to the Supreme Court of South Korea. Seeking answers from all sides, the Unanswered questions the production team attempted to speak to the victim’s parents. However, parents remained wary of the media and refused to participate in interviews, leaving many questions unanswered.
Sources: Nate
