Warning Signs Were There... Missed Chances to Prevent 'Intimate Partner Homicide'

Most intimate partner homicide cases were found to have had warning signs such as threats or violence before the crime occurred. However, many incidents escalated into crimes because these repeated danger signals were not properly recognized or intercepted. Experts emphasize the urgent need for practical preventive measures, such as promptly separating perpetrators and victims of intimate partner violence and systematically managing warning signs.
On the 27th, in recognition of the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women Week (November 25–December 1), our analysis of 10 court rulings containing the keyword 'intimate partner homicide' revealed that among 10 defendants who killed a current or former partner, 7 (70%) received prison sentences and 3 (30%) were sentenced to life imprisonment. The sentences ranged from 15 to 30 years. Factors such as whether the crime was premeditated, prior criminal records, and circumstances before and after the crime influenced the sentencing.
Notably, every case reviewed showed warning signs before the homicide, but these were not prevented.
According to court documents, all defendants were found to have threatened their partners with violent words or actions even before the crime. In one case at the Seoul Eastern District Court, defendant A was sentenced to 20 years in prison after sending a threatening message—'I bought a weapon'—to B, a former schoolmate and romantic partner who had requested a breakup, and ultimately carrying out the crime.
Statistics also confirm that intimate partner violence in close relationships often escalates to homicide. According to the 'Anger Gauge' report released by Korea Women's Hot-Line, at least 181 women were killed by male partners in close relationships last year. The number of women who survived attempted murders was tallied at 374. However, since this count is based on media reports rather than official statistics, the actual number of victims may be higher.
Heo Minsuk, a legislative researcher at the National Assembly Research Service (NARS), explained, 'Intimate partner violence occurs when perpetrators can easily track the victim’s movements. To prevent victims from being harmed or killed, it is essential to completely separate them from the perpetrator. Even if a restraining order is issued, if the perpetrator is not properly monitored, they can approach the victim at any time or place.'
She further advised, 'It is urgent to establish a legal basis for utilizing restraining order systems, and to set a principle that any attempt to violate such orders should be treated as a serious crime.'
Another grave aspect of intimate partner homicide is that not only the victims but also their families suffer psychological and economic hardship. In one case at the Daejeon High Court, defendant C was sentenced to 15 years in prison for entering his ex-girlfriend’s home and strangling her to death. He was found to have severely abused the victim psychologically, prohibiting her from talking to others and frequently using harsh language.
The court stated, 'The victim’s parents feel guilty for not having taken more active measures to prevent the crime, and after the autopsy, they recall their child’s face dozens of times a day. The psychological pain is severe, and it is expected that the victim’s family will also suffer significant economic losses, such as being unable to work properly.'
jyseo@fnnews.com Seo Ji-yoon Reporter