Nana Stabbed Weapon = Knife Sold at O-Mart Where Theft Occurred... "I Swear by My Ancestors" Robber Files Counter-Lawsuit, Sparking 'Secondary Victimization' Controversy [Star Issue]

*This content was translated by AI.

A 30-year-old man accused of breaking into the home of Nana (35, real name Lim Jin-a), a former member of the group After School, and threatening her and her mother with a weapon is continuing to commit secondary victimization through false claims, drawing public outrage.

On the afternoon of the 17th, an appeal trial for A's charges of robbery and injury was held at the Seoul High Court's 14th Criminal Division (Judges Na, Jeong Kyung-geun, Lee Hyung-geun, and Lee Hyun-woo) in Seocho-gu, Seoul.

On that day, the Prosecution Service requested the court: "Considering that Defendant A has a history of multiple crimes, the original sentence was too lenient. We ask that the verdict be overturned and Defendant A be sentenced to 10 years in prison. Given the confrontation between the defendant and the victim, as well as the extent of the victim's injuries, at least indirect intent for injury should have been recognized; however, the original court wrongly acquitted him on this point, committing factual errors and misinterpreting legal principles." The first-instance court had previously sentenced A to seven years in prison.

The Prosecution Service strongly criticized A for persistently making false claims and continuing secondary victimization with an unrepentant attitude even after his lies were exposed. "The defendant has claimed that he never went to the victim's (Nana and her mother) residence with a knife, and that Nana requested him to claim she gave him 40 million won in exchange for letting him keep the weapon. However, A has been convicted of multiple crimes including online second-hand trading fraud, investment scams, drunk driving, injury, and assault. He is currently facing separate trials for insurance fraud disguised as a traffic accident. He also has a prior record of stealing high-end wine from a mart," it pointed out.

It further stated, "Although the prosecutor has met tens of thousands of criminals over more than 20 years, it is rare to encounter someone like this defendant who committed such diverse crimes. The reason I am mentioning his criminal record is that he fundamentally lacks respect for the law and does not know how to reflect on his own mistakes. He is very skilled not only in passive lying but also in actively fabricating non-existent events."

The Prosecution Service added, "The defendant has committed document forgery multiple times and fraud. When he was caught red-handed at Nana and her mother's home, he filed a petition for review of the appropriateness of his detention by falsely claiming that he had not been informed of his right to remain silent, despite having been properly notified by the police. However, after learning during the investigation that the scene of the police informing him of his rights was fully recorded on video, he dismissed it by saying, 'I don't remember hearing it.' After his arrest, he also posted questions on a portal site's knowledge service asking about the crimes he committed and what punishments he would face."

It continued, "Furthermore, the defendant made an unbelievable excuse that he had reached an agreement with Nana regarding him carrying a knife. He also claimed that Nana hid a home camera, but it was confirmed that at the location he mentioned, there was no home camera but rather an air freshener. The knife used by the defendant during the crime is actually a product easily available for purchase anywhere. It was confirmed to be sold at the mart where he had previously committed thefts. However, the defendant claims this knife is a high-end weapon only purchasable at department stores and that it belonged in Nana's home. Yet, the defendant himself admitted to carrying the knife with its sheath in a convenient bag to the scene."

The Prosecution Service concluded, "In summary, based on the above circumstances, the defendant's claims are completely unreliable. Although it is clearly established that the robbery attempt failed and caused injury to the victim during the process, instead of showing remorse, he filed criminal charges and continues to make false statements. It can only be seen as him continuing secondary victimization by exploiting the fact that the victim is a famous celebrity."

However, even in light of the Prosecution Service's criticisms, A continued to plead his innocence. In his final statement, he said, "I am worried that what I say may be contradictory. Nevertheless, as this is my last argument, I will speak with the mindset of clinging to a rotten rope. I am sorry to both victims. All responsibility lies with me. If I had not held such wrong thoughts and taken such actions from the beginning, this would not have happened. Regardless of the reasons, I am truly sorry." He bowed his head.

But soon after, A insisted, "One cannot claim to have done something they did not do. I absolutely did not bring a knife. It is impossible for us, living in a 25 million won rental apartment, to afford an expensive knife that is supposedly sold only at department stores." He refused to retract the claims the Prosecution Service had labeled as false.

Eventually, A tearfully pleaded, "I was even additionally indicted for false accusation. I have reached a point where I must bear everything simply because I am considered a criminal. I cried a lot. It is an unbearable weight to carry."

He said, "I entered that house (Nana's residence) thinking no one would be there and made my judgment. I absolutely had no intention of harming anyone or doing such things. I swear by my deceased ancestors. Please." After mentioning each judge's name one by one, he added, "As a defendant who committed a crime, I know well that asking for leniency is selfish, but with sincere heart, I beg the presiding judge for mercy. Please show me leniency so that I may return to my mother and live a changed life. Once again, I earnestly request that you grant me an opportunity by giving a lenient sentence to the defendant. I am sorry. Thank you." Wiping away tears, he left the courtroom.

A had previously sent a five-page prison letter to multiple media outlets including JTBC's 'Crime Chief' after the crime. At that time, he made the absurd claim: "I needed money for my mother's hospital bills, so I broke into Nana's home. When I told Nana and her mother the truth and apologized, Nana proposed giving me the necessary 40 million won if I claimed to have entered with a weapon." There were also interpretations that A filed a counter-lawsuit as a strategy to reduce his sentence by raising controversy over self-defense. Some speculated that A might have learned this tactic from other inmates.

In response, Nana's agency Sublime stated, "The perpetrator is exploiting the fact that the victim is a celebrity without any attitude of remorse, causing secondary damage through inhuman acts. There will be no leniency. We will pursue all legal measures, both civil and criminal."

Nana said, "While I was enduring mentally difficult times, I learned about this fact (the counter-lawsuit). Such absurd situations are happening now, and I find myself in a situation where I must overcome them." She could not hide her despair.

Previously, A was indicted on November 15 last year at around 5:38 a.m. for breaking into Nana's home in Achon-dong, Guri-si, Gyeonggi-do, with a weapon, threatening her and her mother with it while demanding money, and being subdued by them, resulting in an attempted crime.

As a result of this incident, Nana and her mother B suffered injuries requiring 33 days and 31 days of treatment, respectively. A also claimed he was stabbed in the neck during the struggle and filed a counter-lawsuit against Nana for attempted murder and special injury. Later, Nana's self-defense was recognized, leading to a decision not to prosecute her. The false accusation case filed by Nana's side was sent to the Prosecution Service with an opinion to indict.

The first-instance court determined that A had entered the premises while carrying a weapon and sentenced him to seven years in prison. All of A's claims that he did not carry a weapon at the time of the crime and lacked intent for robbery were rejected. However, the charge of robbery and injury against Nana's mother B was changed to aggravated robbery and upheld as guilty.

The appeal court verdict is scheduled to be announced on October 22.

<© STARNEWS. All rights reserved. No reproduction or redistribution allowed.>

*This content was translated by AI.