Wife convicted of poisoning husband with nicotine in South Korea

Aug.29.2022
Wife convicted of poisoning husband with nicotine in South Korea
A Korean man died from nicotine poisoning, and his wife was suspected of intentionally feeding him the substance.

On a morning in May 2021, a Korean man named A unexpectedly passed away in his home at approximately 7 a.m. After conducting an autopsy, it was determined that the cause of death was nicotine poisoning. As a result, A's wife, B, was named as a suspect in a criminal investigation by the authorities.


Miancha, baizhou, and nicotine solution.


According to reports, A had left work early the day before his death because he was feeling unwell. In a conversation with his wife, B, she informed him that the cause of his illness might have been the expired honey added to his breakfast tea. A was taken to the emergency room shortly after returning home and underwent simple tests and rest before being discharged. He then passed away the following day.


According to the prosecution and the police, it has been suggested that the amount of nicotine found in A's body and their dietary intake indicate that B fed A liquid nicotine three times. It has been reported that B gave A tea containing nicotine in the morning, rice soup containing nicotine when he returned home, and water mixed with liquid nicotine after A returned from the emergency room.


The wife stated that there was no reason to kill her husband.


B claims that "this is a medical accident, she did not kill her husband, and there was no reason for her to do so." The police presented evidence that B had purchased nicotine liquid from a nearby vape shop a few days before the incident. B initially stated that she had bought it for her husband who smoked. However, after investigating the people around A and her credit card usage, the police discovered that A quit smoking eight years ago. B then changed her story and claimed that she had bought the liquid for herself to smoke.


Furthermore, B claims that her husband, A, attempted suicide several months ago and that suicide-related search terms were found on his phone. During this same time, B was involved in a long-term extramarital affair with another man while also accumulating debts exceeding 100 million Korean won.


Most people in the area reported that A's husband also became aware of this fact and, as a result, the couple had a serious argument. The husband also has over 100 million Korean won in life insurance.


According to the judiciary department, the motive for B's murder, which included adultery and debt, was deemed sufficient.


The judiciary department believes that B has a criminal motive.


Firstly, B, the wife, revealed that she had conflicts with her husband in order to maintain a long-term relationship with her lover. If her husband were to die, it would solve her financial difficulties. Furthermore, information left behind by A indicated that he worked hard to support himself and his beloved son, in addition to his profession. There is no reason to believe that he would have made such an extreme choice, given the absence of a suicide note.


In the end, B was sentenced to 30 years in prison and is currently serving the sentence.


Disclaimer: 1. This article is compiled from third-party sources and is only intended for industry communication and learning purposes. 2. The views expressed in this article do not represent those of 2FIRSTS, and 2FIRSTS cannot confirm the authenticity or accuracy of the article's content. The compilation of this article is only intended for industry communication and research purposes. 3. Due to the limited level of compilation, the compiled article may not express exactly the same meaning as the original. Please refer to the original article for accuracy. 4. 2FIRSTS maintains complete consistency with the Chinese government on any statement or position pertaining to domestic, Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan, as well as foreign issues. 5. The copyright for the compiled information belongs to the original media and the authors. If there is any infringement, please contact us for deletion.



Disclaimer

This article is provided solely for professional research, industry discussion, and informational purposes. Any references to brands, companies, products, technologies, or policies are made for factual reporting and analytical purposes only, and do not constitute endorsement, recommendation, promotion, or advertising by 2Firsts.

Nicotine-containing products, including but not limited to cigarettes, e-cigarettes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches, carry significant health risks. Readers are responsible for complying with all applicable laws and regulations in their respective jurisdictions, including age restrictions and access limitations.

The information contained in this article should not be regarded as investment, legal, medical, regulatory, or commercial advice. While 2Firsts strives to ensure the accuracy and reliability of its content, it does not assume liability for any direct or indirect loss arising from errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or reliance on the information contained herein.

This article is not intended for individuals below the legal age for accessing tobacco or nicotine-related information in their jurisdiction.

 

Copyright Notice

This article is either original content produced by 2Firsts or content reproduced, translated, summarized, or adapted from third-party sources with attribution where applicable. The intellectual property rights of the original content remain with 2Firsts or the respective original rights holders.

No individual or organization may copy, reproduce, distribute, republish, modify, translate, or otherwise use this content without prior authorization. Any unauthorized use may result in legal action.

For copyright-related inquiries, corrections, or removal requests, please contact: info@2firsts.com.

 

AI-Assisted Translation and Editing Notice

Portions of this article may have been translated, edited, or reviewed with the assistance of artificial intelligence tools to improve efficiency and readability. Due to the limitations of AI-assisted translation and editing, discrepancies, omissions, or inaccuracies may exist when compared with the original source.

Where applicable, readers are advised to refer to the original source for the most complete and accurate information. If you identify any errors or believe that any content infringes upon your rights, please contact us at info@2firsts.com, and we will review and address the matter promptly.

JUUL Purchasers Ask Ninth Circuit to Preserve Antitrust Classes in Case Over Altria’s $12.8 Billion Investment
JUUL Purchasers Ask Ninth Circuit to Preserve Antitrust Classes in Case Over Altria’s $12.8 Billion Investment
Private antitrust litigation stemming from Altria's 2018 $12.8 billion investment for a 35% economic interest in JUUL is advancing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Direct purchasers, indirect purchasers and indirect resellers of JUUL products filed answering briefs this week seeking to preserve class certifications granted by a California federal court in February. Altria and JUUL argue that individual consumers and large distributors differ too much in purchasing terms to remain in a single direct-purchaser class, while a separate dispute concerns whether California antitrust law can apply to indirect purchasers across 27 jurisdictions. A September trial has been put on hold during the appeal.
Sep.23
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
JUUL2 Sued Within a Week of FDA Authorization as AJ Marketing Alleges Infringement of Programmable Vape Patent
Less than a week after JUUL2 received U.S. FDA marketing authorization on August 28, 2026, JUUL Labs was sued for patent infringement in federal court in Delaware. AJ Marketing LLC filed the complaint on September 3, alleging that both JUUL 1 and JUUL2 infringe U.S. Patent No. 8,851,068 B2. The patent covers aspects of programmable electronic vaporization devices, including controls over dose delivery, usage frequency and operating parameters. The plaintiff is seeking reasonable royalties and ongoing royalties tied to the remaining life of the patent. JUUL has not yet publicly responded to the case.
Sep.10
JTI Makes Third Bet on South Korea as Ploom AURA Enters a Market Dominated by lil and IQOS
JTI Makes Third Bet on South Korea as Ploom AURA Enters a Market Dominated by lil and IQOS
Japan Tobacco International is stepping up its heated tobacco push in South Korea with Ploom AURA. Since its official launch in April 2026, the device's limited First Edition and Glacier White version have sold out, while distribution has expanded across Seoul, Incheon, Gyeonggi Province and airport duty-free channels. The rollout marks JTI's third major attempt to build a stronger heated tobacco position in South Korea, following Ploom TECH in 2019 and Ploom X Advanced in 2024. At the group level, JT plans to invest about ¥800 billion, approximately $5 billion, in reduced-risk products from 2026 through 2028, with heated products and Ploom identified as its primary investment priority.
Aug.14
Product | PIXL Adds 6ml PIXL 5K in UK Alongside 12ml PIXL 8000 as Vape Duty Takes Effect
Product | PIXL Adds 6ml PIXL 5K in UK Alongside 12ml PIXL 8000 as Vape Duty Takes Effect
Vaping brand PIXL has introduced the PIXL 5K reusable prefilled pod device in the UK, featuring a 2ml prefilled pod and a 4ml refill container with a combined e-liquid capacity of 6ml. The device uses 20mg/ml nicotine salt e-liquid and is advertised to deliver up to approximately 5,000 puffs. Available through UK retailers by August 2026, the PIXL 5K sits alongside the existing 12ml PIXL 8000. The UK's Vaping Products Duty took effect on October 1 at £0.22 per millilitre, producing theoretical duty amounts of £1.32 and £2.64 for the two products' respective full refill sets.
product
Oct.10
China Tobacco Zhejiang files patent for pressure-triggered, on-demand oral nicotine release
China Tobacco Zhejiang files patent for pressure-triggered, on-demand oral nicotine release
China Tobacco Zhejiang Industrial Co., Ltd. has filed a patent application for an oral nicotine delivery product designed to let users actively adjust nicotine release. The product embeds two types of nicotine reservoirs with different wall thicknesses and positions inside a deformable matrix. Pressure applied with the tongue or lips can rupture the reservoirs and accelerate nicotine release. In simulated oral tests, several patent examples showed sharply higher peak nicotine release rates as applied force increased from 0 N to 1 N and 3 N. The filing explores a shift from preset release profiles toward user-triggered nicotine delivery.
Sep.01
U.S. Fifth Circuit Vacates NicQuid Vape MDO, Says FDA Comparative-Efficacy Standard Violated APA Procedures
U.S. Fifth Circuit Vacates NicQuid Vape MDO, Says FDA Comparative-Efficacy Standard Violated APA Procedures
According to VitalLaw on August 27, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated an FDA marketing denial order (MDO) against NicQuid LLC, ruling that the agency’s comparative-efficacy standard for electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) applications had become a substantive rule requiring notice-and-comment rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The court did not reject FDA’s authority to compare the public health benefits and risks of flavored vapes, but held that the agency could not establish a broadly binding standard through informal adjudications. The case was remanded to FDA for further proceedings.
Aug.28