<Anchor> The



perpetrator Jeon has been stalking continuously since last year with threats, but he has not been arrested.

Nevertheless, our society's safeguards to protect the victims were insufficient.

Criticism is growing that the courts and investigative agencies failed to stop the brutal crimes due to the passive response.



This content was covered by reporter Kim Bo-mi.



<Reporter>



Yesterday (15th), who was about to be sentenced to trial, all five charges were applied to Mr. Jeon, and the prosecution also asked for 9 years in prison.



This is because the charges were heavy and the crime was bad, including illegal filming and intimidation of sex crimes, and stalking contact 370 times from 2019 to February.



However, throughout the investigation process that began with the complaint of the victim, Jeon was not arrested.



First of all, the arrest warrant initially requested by the police was rejected by the court, stating that the residence is fixed and there is no fear of escaping.



It is known that Jeon worked as an accountant for two years at an accounting firm before joining the Seoul Transportation Corporation, and criticism is coming out that this professional characteristic may have influenced the reason for dismissal.



[Jang Yun-mi / Attorney: Of course (affects).

If you have a professional qualification and a solid job, you will at least not escape even if you commit a crime with a relatively high reproachability.

.]



In the additional investigation conducted by the second victim complaint, the fact that the police did not even apply for an arrest warrant without taking measures to protect the victim was also raised.



[Lee Su-jeong / Professor of Criminal Psychology, Kyonggi University: The police should have applied for an arrest warrant.

I should have asked for a temporary measure even if it was an order to restrain access to the victim, but I didn't take it.]



The Stalking Punishment Act, which took effect in October of last year, is also pointed out that the victim protection measures are weak.



In stalking crimes, when the victim withdraws the will to punish, the investigation ends and the agreement works as a reason for mitigation in the trial.



Victims are also afraid of retaliatory crimes if they reluctantly agree or refuse.



As the Stalking Punishment Act only targets continuous crimes, it is also difficult to take action and punish perpetrators in the early stages of an incident.



(Video coverage: Kang Dong-cheol, Kim Se-kyung, Lee Chan-soo, video editing: Lee So-young)