The jailed woman gets again again after 60 years to cut the attacker’s tongue

The jailed woman gets again again after 60 years to cut the attacker’s tongue

The jailed woman gets again again after 60 years to cut the attacker’s tongue

The South Korean court has reopened a woman’s case which was sentenced in 1965 after defending herself against sexual harassment. The ruling, which now gives a grant to 78-year-old Choi Mal-Ja A Retric, has discussed justice for victims of sexual violence in the country.

The decision of the Busan High Court comes after years of legal efforts by Choi, who has repeatedly reversed the convict received as an 18-year-old child.

In 1964, Choi was attacked near his house by a 21 -year -old man, identified by his surname, Noh. In a work of self -defense, he ends the attack by away from 1.5 cm of his tongue.

Despite his claims of acting to save himself, Choi was convicted of increased physical damage and sentenced to 10 months jail with suspended sentence for two years. Meanwhile, his attacker was sentenced to six months in jail, which was also suspended for two years.

In an 2020 interview with Korea Herald, Choi recalled how he was pressurized to accept his sentence. “I said that I have not done anything wrong, and (the prosecutor) said that if I do not comply, I have to spend the rest of my life in jail,” he said

He also said that his family spent his life savings at a colony with Noh, which continued to bother him and even broke into his house, threatening him and his sister with a knife. .

In search of Choi’s justice, he gained momentum in the 2000s when he pursued higher education and recognized his punishment injustice. With the support of a women’s rights group, she demanded a comeback, but her initial requests were rejected due to insufficient evidence.

The Supreme Court intervened, directed the Busan High Court to take a decision.

In its latest judgment, the Busan High Court stated that Choi’s testimony remained “special and consistent” over the years. It also accepts concerns that he may have been illegally detained during the original investigation, violating the country’s Criminal Procedure Act.

The court said, “There are enough grounds to believe that there was illegal arrest and custody without warrant.”

Zeen Subscribe
A customizable subscription slide-in box to promote your newsletter
[mc4wp_form id="314"]