In an unsolved sexual assault case from 13 years ago, the defendant was sentenced to eight years in prison, instead of being found innocent.

The defendant in an unsolved sexual assault case from 13 years ago who was found not guilty in the first instance was given a heavy sentence. The Daegu High Court has decided to impose a heavy sentence on the defendant in the special law on the punishment of sexual violence crimes.
On the 30th, the court announced that it had overturned the original verdict of acquittal for Defendant A, a man in his 40s who had been indicted on charges of assault, including causing bodily harm, and sentenced him to eight years in prison.
In addition, they will be required to wear an electronic ankle band (a location tracking device) for 10 years, disclose their personal information for 10 years, and report their involvement with children, adolescents, and people with disabilities for 10 years.
In March 2011, defendant A broke into the home of Ms. B, who lives in Cheongju, North Chungcheong Province, and sexually assaulted the victim.
He is suspected of stealing money and valuables and then fleeing. Investigative authorities collected DNA samples left at the scene and requested forensic analysis, but were unable to find any matching information and the case remains unsolved.
After that, in 2022-2023, the investigating authorities will investigate all unsolved cases and add the DNA of the perpetrator of a sexual assault case that occurred in 2011 to the National Forensic Service's data.
During this process, it was confirmed that the DNA of Defendant A, who was arrested in connection with a different sexual assault case, matched that of the suspect in the 2011 incident.
However, the defendant A, who was on trial, had never met B, and even if they had had a sexual relationship, it was consensual.
In May of this year, the first instance trial court found defendant A not guilty, citing that the victim's testimony lacked credibility, including that the time of the crime that B testified about in court did not match the facts of the indictment.
The prosecution appealed, and the second trial court imposed a heavy sentence. The second trial court stated, "DNA taken from the crime scene matched the defendant's DNA, and the victim confirmed that the crime had been committed a long time ago.
Although the content of the statement made by the defendant differs in part from the facts of the indictment because of the circumstances surrounding the crime, it is difficult to conclude that the statement is not credible.