In the ‘Yongin elevator flyer’ incident, which was controversial over excessive investigation, the police decided not to charge a teenage middle school student who was accused of damaging property by tearing down a poster.
On May 11th, a middle school student took down an unauthorized leaflet attached to a mirror in an apartment elevator in Yongin, Gyeonggi-do. Capture of JTBC incident squad leader’s press screen
The Gyeonggi Yongin Eastern Police Station announced on the 7th that on the 25th of last month, it had notified the prosecution of the results of the supplementary investigation regarding Miss A’s alleged property damage with a recommendation not to forward the case. Afterwards, the prosecution issued a final decision not to indict Ms. A around the 5th of this month.
Previously, Ms. A was accused of tearing down an unauthorized post on a mirror while heading to her house in the elevator of her apartment in Yongin City on May 11. At the time, Ms. A was said to have removed the post as it was blocking her view while looking in the mirror. It was found that the post was posted by the residents’ self-governing organization in the apartment to gather residents’ opinions on defect repairs, and did not receive approval from the management office for posting.
Nevertheless, the police at the time judged that Ms. A’s actions met the requirements for property damage and forwarded the case to the prosecution. In addition, like Ms. A, resident B, in her 60s, who tore up the post, and Mr. C, the manager of the management office who covered up and attached another post on top of the post in question, were also sent.
Afterwards, both sides raised issues through Kookmin Shinmungo, and when the case became known, controversy over ‘excessive investigation’ arose. The Gyeonggi Southern Police Agency, a superior agency, judged that there were additional considerations in the case and decided to conduct a supplementary investigation in consultation with the prosecution. did it The police, who analyzed about 80 related cases, changed their opinion to ‘no charges’, citing the fact that the post in question was interfering with the function of the mirror in the elevator and that Ms. A and others had no intention of causing damage.
A police official explained, “After reviewing the legal principles along with additional investigation of the suspect and witnesses, we determined that the charge of property damage was not applicable.”
Reporter Ahn Kyung-jun eyewhere@segye.com
(ⓒ Segye Ilbo & Segye.com, unauthorized reproduction and redistribution prohibited)
Source: www.segye.com
