Doctor sentenced to four years for disposing of woman's body

A doctor has been sentenced to four years in prison for disposing of a woman's body at a Tongyeong pier after she died from a propofol overdose. The 57-year-old physician, who operated a clinic in Geoje, had administered 1,391mL of the drug across 26 doses over two months before the victim died.

A 41-year-old woman, who had been administered a total of 1,391mL of propofol across 26 doses over two months, was eventually found dead at sea. The woman had visited the hospital to treat insomnia, but her body was ultimately abandoned at a pier. The doctor, who was responsible for protecting the patient's life, was found to have attempted to conceal the circumstances of the death, leading the court to sentence him to four years in prison. The case, which highlights both medical responsibility and loopholes in drug management, has resurfaced, causing shock.

The third episode of the E Channel original web variety show "Hyung-suda" Season 3, released on the 23rd via the YouTube channel "Detectives' Chat," covered the so-called "propofol overdose and body disposal case" that occurred around Tongyeong and Geoje in Gyeongsangnam-do in 2017. Lee Nak-jun, an otolaryngologist and author of the web novel "The Trauma Center: Golden Hour," appeared on the broadcast to analyze the circumstances and the issues regarding the drug administration process from a medical expert's perspective.

The incident began on the morning of July 5, 2017, when the body of a woman with a broken neck was discovered at a pier in a seaside village in Tongyeong, Gyeongsangnam-do. The woman was clothed, and no obvious external trauma was identified. Personal belongings, including an antidepressant bottle and a wristwatch, were left nearby. While it was difficult to determine the exact cause of death from the scene alone, the investigation took an unexpected turn once the police began their inquiry.

While analyzing CCTV footage near the pier, police captured an SUV that entered the access road during the early morning hours, stayed for approximately 30 minutes, and then departed. The person who rented the vehicle was a 57-year-old doctor, referred to as A, who operated a private clinic in Geoje. The deceased woman was a 41-year-old resident of Geoje who had been receiving treatment at A's clinic. Once the relationship between the patient and the doctor was revealed, police began tracing whether there was a connection between the woman's death and A.

Suspicious traces were also found inside the vehicle during the investigation. The victim's DNA was detected on the seat, and a fixing pin identical to the earrings worn by the victim was found in the trunk. Police attempted to check the internal CCTV footage of the clinic operated by A, but the relevant footage had already been deleted. The building owner testified that they deleted the footage at A's request. With the key evidence of what occurred inside the hospital gone, police continued the investigation by securing external CCTV footage.

External CCTV showed the victim entering the hospital on July 4, the day before her death, but there was no footage of her leaving. The broadcast reported that after restoring the deleted hospital CCTV footage, scenes were confirmed showing A injecting the drug into the victim. An autopsy also revealed propofol in the victim's blood. It was also revealed that the woman, who had visited the hospital for insomnia, had been administered a total of 1,391mL of propofol over approximately two months through 26 doses.

Explaining the dosage of propofol, Lee Nak-jun stated, "15ml is sufficient for sleep anesthesia." While the appropriate dosage can vary depending on the purpose of the procedure, the patient's condition, and the method of administration, the cumulative dosage and the circumstances of repeated administration presented on the broadcast raised questions about whether medical safety management was properly conducted. Propofol is an anesthetic used in medical settings, but it is also a drug that can cause serious side effects such as respiratory depression. More important than the administration itself is having a system in place to continuously monitor the patient's condition and respond immediately to danger.

A was a doctor with experience working as a university hospital professor. He opened his private clinic about four months before the victim died, but initially faced management difficulties and debt issues. It was reported that as rumors spread that propofol could be administered relatively easily, patients from other regions, including those with insomnia and workers in the entertainment industry, began visiting. During the investigation, circumstances emerged that A repeatedly administered propofol without sufficiently checking the patients' health conditions. The seriousness of the case is highlighted by the fact that if professional medical knowledge and qualifications are not used to protect patient safety, they can instead become a means of increasing danger.

The victim had visited the hospital on the day of the incident. The broadcast explained that while A was administering propofol consecutively, the victim exhibited symptoms of convulsions and respiratory depression; although cardiopulmonary resuscitation was attempted, she ultimately died. It was reported that the hospital's fluid room was not equipped with monitoring equipment to continuously observe the patient's condition at the time. Whether the medical staff could quickly detect and respond to danger signals at the moment the patient's life was at risk is one of the core issues of the case.

An even more shocking aspect is what occurred after the victim died. A showed signs of attempting to destroy evidence, such as requesting the building owner to delete CCTV footage from the hospital and the elevator. It was later investigated that he used a rental car to move the body to a pier in Tongyeong and dispose of it. It was revealed that he left the victim's belongings at the scene in an attempt to make the circumstances of death appear differently. The suspicion that a doctor, who should identify the cause of death and take necessary measures, instead attempted to hide the incident raises fundamental questions about medical ethics and responsibility.

While A admitted to the disposal of the body, he claimed that what he administered to the victim on the day of her death was a nutritional injection, not propofol. In response, Lee Nak-jun expressed doubt, stating, "While a patient can die from just receiving fluids, it is highly implausible if the patient is 41 years old and has no underlying or heart disease." However, this statement is the opinion of the expert appearing on the broadcast, and the specific cause of death and responsibility must be examined based on the facts confirmed in the investigation and trial.

Separate drug-related actions by a hospital staff member were also revealed during the investigation. According to the broadcast, during the time A was moving the body, a nursing assistant at the hospital broke into the clinic, stole propofol, and administered it to themselves at home. Subsequently, while intoxicated by the drug, the assistant assaulted their spouse, and the act was revealed after a report of domestic violence was filed. The fact that drugs that should be managed in a medical institution were leaked externally, and that misuse occurred even among medical staff, demonstrates the loopholes in the drug management system at the time.

A was indicted on charges including occupational negligence resulting in death, abandonment of a corpse, and violation of the Narcotics Control Act. On December 20, 2017, the first instance court sentenced A to four years in prison and a fine of 3 million won. Upon hearing the news of the verdict, Lee Nak-jun questioned, "Four years? When a person died?" before expressing bitterness, saying, "The fact that such a thing happened is just..."

This case does not stop at mere suspicions of drug overdose. It leaves heavy questions as the responsibility to control the dangers of drugs in medical settings, the duty to observe patient conditions and respond to emergencies, and the minimum ethics to uncover the truth after death were all shaken at once. The case, which extended from the repeated administration of propofol and issues with patient monitoring systems to the disposal of the body and the deletion of evidence, serves as a reminder that medical professionalism is not guaranteed by a license itself, but is only justified through responsible judgment and action.

Read the original (Korean)