[CC/FULL] Judge vs. Judge EP06 (3/3) | 이판사판

[CC/FULL] Judge vs. Judge EP06 (3/3) | 이판사판

Articles, Blog , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 Comment

Congrats on the election. You are the most powerful
politician both in name and reality. The only thing left is for
you to claim your throne. This guy… You don’t talk like a judge. It’s too early to be celebrating. I heard the petition for Jang
Soon-bok’s retrial is dismissed. The chief judge of
the panel is inadequate, it should’ve been dismissed earlier. I’m glad that it was dismissed,
so it’s fine. Lee Jung-joo… She must’ve come to her
senses after her brother died. It seems like she’s going
to file a petition for her brother’s retrial though… Her brother…
so you mean Choi Kyung-ho? She’s going to file
a petition for his retrial? [Kim Joo-hyung] Judge Sa, Judge Lee is here… Can I help you? Our judicial panel decided to dismiss
the petition for Jang Soon-bok’s retrial. Is there a reason why I need
to hear that information? Regardless of the decision
your judicial panel came upon, I believe your panel’s decision must
not and cannot affect my decision. Yes, I know, but… Judge Lee, please have this. Please go out and drink the juice. What’s with him? I looked at the cases he was assigned today and Judge Sa was
assigned with Kyung-ho’s case. He drew a line and
put distance to me too. Now, I get why everyone calls
him the most impartial judge. I’m really glad that the case
wasn’t concluded as self-defense. Prosecutor Do Han-joon
charged him with manslaughter. We will now begin Defendant Kim Joo-hyung’s trial case
number 2017330, for manslaughter. Defendant, you and I have met
in a courtroom for another case. Yes. If you believe that due to the history,
I may not give you a fair trial, do you wish to file a motion
substitute with your counsel? No, Your Honor. We are aware of your fairness and impartiality so we do not have
any intention of filing for a motion. Defendant, sit properly and participate
in the trial with your utmost attention. The defendant can refuse to answer
questions that may be used against you. Now, the trial’s issue
of the law is self-defense. Self-defense is neither retaliation nor preparation for violation in
the past or future but self-defense must be applied to
the violation in the present only. Furthermore, the defendant cannot
be aggressive in his defense but it must be carried out solely
to protect oneself from violence. The act of self-defense must be
socially acceptable, in other words, the people must acknowledge
the reason of the act. Prosecution and the defendant’s
counsel must base arguments on this and I’d appreciate if you can
argue with the law, not emotions. – Yes, Your Honor.
– Yes, Your Honor. Now, we’ll begin with the review of
the prosecution’s submitted evidence. Yes, let’s take a look at the footage
I’ve submitted as evidence. As you can see in the video, the defendant followed the victim,
Choi Kyung-ho, to the bathroom. Objection, Your Honor. The prosecutor used the phrase
that the defendant followed the victim and he’s claiming that
the defendant predetermined the act. But this is contrary to
what actually happened. According to the statement of
the corrections office in charge, the defendant already went to
the bathroom 10 minutes ago. That’s because there are
times I need to go constantly. Defendant. So what’s your point? If the defendant went to
the bathroom for no specific reason, this is considered as an intent to
murder Choi Kyung-ho and it wanes down the contingency of self-defense. Objection. Prosecutor Do, you must provide
us the facts, not your conjectures. Yes, Your Honor. Let me continue. Please pay attention to this part. Choi Kyung-ho
grabbed the victim’s collar, but he stopped his attack. With this clip, you can see
that Choi Kyung-ho had stopped his attack completely. If this was self-defense, the whole
incident must’ve stopped here. However, it seems the defendant is
trying to shake off Choi Kyung-ho so the defendant attacked
the victim one more time. Therefore, every action after this point on must be
considered excessive defense. Objection. There are many ways
to interpret the footage. How can we be sure that
Choi Kyung-ho stopped his attack from a surveillance
footage with bad quality? Please play the video again. Yes. Yes, thank you. This does open up
for other interpretations. Your Honor, I request
to examine a witness. I’d like to request a corrections
officer as a witness who observed Choi Kyung-ho and
Kim Joo-hyung up close. Yes, I’ll allow it.
Witness, please step forward. I solemnly swear I will tell the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth, and I affirm that I will face
penalties of perjury if I falsely testify. Witness, Park Jin-ho. After Choi Kyung-ho
assaulted the defendant, did the defendant avoid
Choi Kyung-ho out of fear? No, Kim Joo-hyung approached
Choi Kyung-ho first and talked to him. Why did the defendant approach Choi Kyung-ho if he felt
his life was in danger? That’s all. Would you like to
cross-examine the witness? Yes. Now, witness, didn’t you witness Choi Kyung-ho trying to
assault Kim Joo-hyung in prison? Didn’t he ask the defendant
to murder someone? Pardon? This guy asked me to
kill someone for him. I don’t kill people. Yes, that did happen. He did ask the defendant
to kill someone. He could’ve been
sent to the solitary cell, but he wasn’t because
he was a model inmate. I see. Choi Kyung-ho constantly approached Kim Joo-hyung with
malice aforethought in prison. Please direct your
attention to the screen. He used the sharpened toothbrush as his weapon on the day of
the incident and Choi Kyung-ho’s DNA and fingerprints were
detected from the toothbrush. This proves Choi Kyung-ho’s intent to kill Kim Joo-hyung
and this is a definite evidence. Kim Joo-hyung only acted in order to protect and escape from
danger of being killed, therefore, this concludes he acted
out of self-defense. That’s all. After Choi Kyung-ho’s death, where
was Kim Joo-hyung, the defendant? Since he caused trouble,
he was imprisoned in the solitary cell. I see. You called for me? Yes, I’d like to review the evidence. So I think I should check the prison where Kim Joo-hyung
killed Choi Kyung-ho. The scene of the crime? You’ve lost so much weight. Professor Yoo. I need to know what’s making it so hard for you that
you keep ignoring me. Talk to me. I really didn’t want to
believe it either, but… I really didn’t want to
have to tell you this, but… What is it? My brother’s case
from 10 years ago… That decision that
you made was incorrect, and I think it was
because of your son. Hey, judge. You’re amazing. Most judges don’t go
to the scene of the crime. What about prosecutors? Only in dramas, but prosecutors
usually don’t go either. I’m only going
because you’re going. Don’t pretend that we’re close. I’m going as the judge
for Kim Joo-hyung’s case. And you’re the prosecutor. Why would I pretend
to be close with you? We’re already close. We will now verify the events of case number 2017334
at the scene of the crime. The prosecution and
defense are both present. Now, please explain what happened. Yes, Choi Kyung-ho approached
the defendant Kim Joo-hyung with his sharpened toothbrush as a weapon
and threatened the defendant’s life… Where did you say Choi
Kyung-ho’s toothbrush was found? Was it around here? Right when Choi Kyung-ho
grabbed the defendant to stab him, he dropped the toothbrush? Let’s discuss Choi
Kyung-ho’s intent to kill, which defense asserts. You said his sharpening his
toothbrush into a weapon supports your assertion that
he intended to kill, right? If he planned for
that long to kill him, don’t you think he dropped
the weapon too easily? Or perhaps he didn’t have an intent to kill since he dropped
the weapon so easily. Ms. Lee Jung-joo,
the court will make the decision. You’re the victim’s family so just
point us to what we should see. Sure. Then, shall we go over there? The place where
Choi Kyung-ho died… Where was it exactly? Here. Defendant, where was the location
you pushed Choi Kyung-ho? Here. Hey, it was here. Was it? Defendant, please cooperate
with the investigation. For five hours after the incident, Kim
Joo-hyung did not use the bathroom. Yes, since he was locked
in solitary confinement. Defense, immediately prior to the prison transport
departing the prison, the defendant had to use the bathroom
and had to stress that point. Is that correct? Yes, that’s correct. According to the surveillance clips
of immediately after the incident, the defendant did not leave his cell
in solitary confinement for five hours. Please explain. Pardon? The defendant claimed he
needed to use the bathroom, but that assertion seems
to lack credibility. I see. Prosecution, during the past trial, you submitted Choi
Kyung-ho’s autopsy report. Was there anything notable? Yes, at this time, the muscle in Choi Kyung-ho’s
right wrist was ruptured. Medically, if the muscle in his right wrist was ruptured he would
lack the strength to grab anything with force and I submit
a doctor’s opinion stating such. But it’s true that he
strangled the defendant. For someone being strangled by
a person with a ruptured muscle, the defendant’s reaction seen in
the video appears to be excessive. The court asked National Institute
of Scientific Investigation to review the material and according to
the criminologist who reviewed the material,
the defendant’s reaction in the video was contrary to those who
commit a spontaneous crime. Prosecution, defense,
in most situations, if one tries to block
someone else’s sudden attack, and that person falls
and starts to bleed, what would that person do? If you watch the video, the defendant and Choi
Kyung-ho were in a scuffle at 1:14. And Choi Kyung-ho fell at 1:16pm,
according to the video. And about 3 minutes after that, the defendant did not move much
at all nor did he even call the guards. Based on this judge’s personal
visit to the scene of the crime, the guards were not very far
from the scene of the crime. Also, based on the expert’s opinion,
in the event of self-defense, most assailants move and take action
within 30 seconds of the incident. Based on the circumstances
that we’ve seen so far, the defendant’s assertion of
self-defense is not convincing… Prosecution, do you
have anything to say? Prosecution asserts that this incident was definitely not
self-defense and his actions appear to have been
intentional and not by mistake. So, this case was that
of intentional murder, therefore, I will revise the indictment
to charge the defendant of murder. Your Honor, the prosecutor is trying to dictate the case on his own will
without any evidence to support him. Then, prosecution will
submit a revised indictment. Yes, Your Honor. The defendant may prepare for trial
according to the revised indictment. The next trial date is
one week from today. This concludes today’s trial. What are you doing
out when it’s cold? Thank you. Thanks to you, my brother
wasn’t framed for murder twice. I only did my job. Han-joon did all the work. Do you still suspect him? Prosecutor Do Han-joon… I’m sure he wanted to protect
Choi Kyung-ho for your sake. He was being suspected
for being the real killer, but he couldn’t tell you the truth… Do you now understand
why I couldn’t tell her? It may put her in danger. That’s… That’s what I fear
the most in the world. It was in case you
were put in danger. There’s something even
the prosecutor was afraid of. What do you mean it
may put me in danger? Kim Joo-hyung… He received a threat that if he’s not
found not guilty for self-defense, you’d be killed. A threat?
From who? Han-joon thinks it’s
someone so powerful, that even Choi Kyung-ho was
mistake about who the real killer was. Who in the world… It may put you more in danger if you know which is the reason
why he couldn’t tell you. Yes? Yong-soo? Where’s Kim Ga-young’s shoes?
You didn’t give it back yet? I don’t have it anymore. You remember this, right?

One thought on “[CC/FULL] Judge vs. Judge EP06 (3/3) | 이판사판

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *