▲ The Supreme Court of Korea
The Supreme Court has overturned a lower court's guilty verdict in a rape case, which had been based on DNA evidence submitted approximately two and a half years after the incident occurred.
The court ruled that the probative value of DNA evidence must be strictly scrutinized, and that the prosecution failed to sufficiently prove that the evidence had not been tampered with or compromised.
The First Petty Bench of the Supreme Court (Justice Cheon Dae-yeop presiding) recently set aside the appellate court's guilty verdict against a defendant, identified as A, who was charged with rape, and remanded the case to the Gwangju High Court.
A was indicted on charges of raping B in his vehicle in August 2021.
The first trial resulted in an acquittal, with the court stating, "It has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant committed rape by using force to such an extent that it made it significantly difficult for the victim to resist."
The verdict was reversed during the appellate trial after DNA analysis was conducted on the pants the victim was wearing at the time of the incident.
The appellate court had accepted the results, which showed the defendant's DNA, and concluded that the damage to parts of the pants supported the credibility of the victim's testimony that the damage occurred while she was defending herself.
However, the Supreme Court challenged the probative value of the DNA evidence and reversed the decision once again.
The court noted that the pants in question were submitted to investigative authorities in January 2024, more than two years after the incident. It pointed out that there was no investigation or lower court deliberation regarding whether the pants had been tampered with or damaged while in the victim's possession, or the circumstances behind the delayed submission.
The Supreme Court also determined that the possibility of the pants being compromised could not be easily ruled out, given that DNA from an unidentified person was also detected alongside that of the defendant and the victim.
The Supreme Court cited a legal principle stating that "scientific evidence carries significant weight in fact-finding only when it is proven that all underlying facts are true, the inference methods are scientifically valid, and the possibility of error is either non-existent or negligible."
The court stated, "The prosecution must provide additional proof to ensure that the integrity of the evidence is maintained throughout the entire process—including collection, storage, and analysis—and that there was no tampering, damage, or addition. The lower court also needs to deliberate and judge the credibility of the victim's testimony based on this."
The Supreme Court added, "This is especially true when the evidence is the sole or primary support for the charges, as blind faith in its scientific nature could undermine the strict standards of proof that are essential to criminal proceedings."
Furthermore, the Supreme Court emphasized that for an appellate court to overturn a first-instance verdict, it must be clear that the initial assessment of evidence was flawed, that maintaining the original reasoning would be significantly unjust, or that new objective grounds affecting the formation of judicial conviction have emerged during the appellate proceedings.
(Photo: Yonhap News TV, Yonhap News)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.