사형집행방식과 집행시설에 대한 고찰 = A study on Methods of Capital Punishment and Execution Facilities in South Korea

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The Republic of Korea belongs to the so-called ‘de facto abolitionist countries’. The background enabling it to maintain this designation for nearly 30 years—granted to nations that have not carried out executions for over a decade—lies in practical efforts and tangible contributions. These efforts internalized the values of human rights and human dignity within rational judgments regarding capital punishment, ensuring its execution should not be used as a political or social scapegoat despite societal changes. Furthermore, the belief and will to firmly uphold and respect the liberal democratic system enshrined in the Constitution underpin this trend. This foundation enabled the nation to overcome several perilous junctures where the resumption of executions was seriously considered.
However, the death penalty has not been completely abolished but remains dormant. When crime rates in society reach critical levels, public sentiment mistakenly believes that the key to solving the problem lies in the implementation of capital punishment, constantly demanding its reinstatement. Yet, when one properly confronts and understands how, where, and in what manner the death penalty has been carried out, and what the state's primary purpose in executing it has been, one comes to recognize that the boundless trust placed in this punishment and the value placed upon it have been either grossly exaggerated or rendered meaningless.
This study examines the procedures and methods of capital punishment execution, the beginning and end of the last execution, the duties of executioners, the whereabouts of the execution manual, and the rope used in the execution. It also examined execution facilities—three existing execution sites, two closed sites, and those lost to history—along with the post-execution handling of executed death row inmates, based on available data. Observing the reality of executions carried out in these places—where hidden truth far exceed known facts under the guise of national security facilities—and examining the final moments faced by those sentenced to death, we still encounter unfinished tasks.
These are issues that both proponents of retaining the death penalty and opponents advocating its abolition must discuss and review together. Should discussions on this matter unfold from a neutral standpoint and reach their conclusion, the death penalty system will begin its journey toward complete and irreversible abolition.