The Korean program "Brave Detectives" sparks outrage as it revisits shocking cases of lenient sentencing.
In a special Chuseok episode aired on October 14, the show's hosts, including An Jung-hwan and Lee Yi-kyung, explored the controversial sentencing outcomes from notorious cases over the past three years. Joined by former judge Jeong Jae-min and model Song Hae-na, the discussion highlighted particularly shocking rulings that provoked public anger. Notably, the hosts expressed their frustration with the inadequacy of sentences, with Song Hae-na reflecting on the absurd nature of some of the punishments assigned.
One case that drew immense public attention was the Yongin torture incident, which An Jung-hwan cited as his most infuriating moment. This case, involving a 10-year-old drowning victim who was ultimately revealed to have died due to horrific abuse by family members, had sentencing viewed as disproportionately light, aggravating public sentiment. An Jung-hwan described his strong emotional reaction, mentioning it still pains him to recall such distressing events.
The show also unveiled manipulation tactics used to reduce sentences, including the infamous "Cheonghak-dong melon potato" case. In this instance, the perpetrator pretended to act mentally unstable after committing heinous acts, a strategic move that historically guaranteed a lighter penalty. Jeong Jae-min clarified that, while previously leniency was often the norm, current judicial practices allow judges to exercise discretion, making sentence reductions rarer.
Moreover, the episode addressed the issue of monetary compensation leading to minimized punishments, highlighting cases where the victims’ families unexpectedly sought financial settlements. Viewers expressed outrage over the perceived injustice, advocating for more stringent legal reforms that dissuade such practices.
As the broadcast concluded, Song Hae-na emphasized the importance of gathering viewer opinions, hoping to inspire meaningful change in the legal system, while Jeong Jae-min reiterated that public sentiment is increasingly being considered in judicial matters.
