A 35-year prison sentence has been confirmed for a mother charged with the so-called 'Jung In-i case', which abused and killed a 16-month-old adopted child 'Jung In-i'.



The 3rd division of the Supreme Court (Chief Justice Kim Jae-hyeong) confirmed the lower court sentenced to 35 years in prison today (28th) by the high court of appeals for the mother-in-law Jang, who was charged with murder and other charges.



Ahn, who was accused of violating the Child Welfare Act (abandonment and neglect), was also sentenced to five years in prison.



Yang Mo Jang was arrested and charged with habitual assault and abuse of her daughter Jeong In-yang, who was adopted between June and October 2020, and on October 13th, by giving a strong shock to her abdomen with her hands or feet.



The prosecution applied the charges of murder as the surrounding charges and the charges of child abuse as a preliminary indictment. is.



Mr. Jang denied the intention to kill, but the courts of the first and second trial found that he had intention to kill, at least inevitably, and found him guilty of murder.



However, judgments about the sentencing were mixed.



The court of first instance sentenced the victim to life imprisonment, saying, "It caused the victim to die through unimaginable atrocities." It is difficult to believe that he did,” he said, and commuted the sentence to 35 years of fixed-term imprisonment.



The court of appeals said that it cannot be said that Jang had meticulously planned the crime in advance and prepared for the murder, and that the psychological problems that Jang had had had an influence on the crime.



Ahn, who was also charged with mistreatment such as neglecting Jeong-in and acquiescing to his wife Jang's abuse, was sentenced to five years in prison for both the first and second counts.



Both the prosecution and the adoptive parents appealed against the ruling, but the Supreme Court did not accept it.



In response to the prosecution's claim that the sentence was light, the court said, "The reason for the appeal of unfair sentencing set forth in the latter part of Article 383, No. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act is for the benefit of the accused who has been sentenced to imprisonment of 10 years or more by interpretation." We cannot file an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing that is unfavorable to the accused, such as that the sentence of the sentence is light."



Prosecutors demanded the death penalty for Yang Mo Jang in the first and second counts.



The Supreme Court explained, "It is meaningful in that it reaffirmed the position of the Supreme Court precedent in 1994 that the reason for the appeal of the injustice of sentencing could be argued only for the benefit of the accused, and explained the reason in relatively detail."



When the Supreme Court's verdict came out today, there was a commotion in the courtroom.



Some of the audience shouted, "Repeat the judgment," or "Are you going to make a judgment like this?" at the Supreme Court, which confirmed the second trial, which lowered the sentence of wool, or threw clothes and bags while being dragged away by court officials.