The origin of the incident dates back to last March. Kim Dong-hwan accessed the airline's flight schedule system without permission using another person's ID and monitored his fellow captains' every move. He meticulously prepared the crime for eight months, and eventually came up with a detailed plan to murder six colleagues. In fact, on March 16th, he attacked and attempted to kill a captain in Goyang, Gyeonggi Province, and the next day, on the 17th, he committed a terrible crime by stabbing and killing another captain in Busan. Afterwards, he moved to Changwon and attempted to commit additional crimes, and his crazy actions finally came to a halt when he was caught by the police in Ulsan 14 hours later.

Kim Dong-hwan's attitude revealed during the trial once again shocked the public. After insisting on a public participation trial several times and trying to utilize the judicial process, he suddenly changed his attitude and withdrew his plan and announced that he would undergo a regular criminal trial. Some in the legal community have raised the possibility that the strategy of appealing to the emotions of jurors or shaking up the outcome of the trial was judged to be fruitless. Nevertheless, while he admitted most of the facts of the indictment, he disagreed with some of the affidavits and showed a duplicitous appearance as if he was trying to secure the legitimacy of his crime. This is read as an attempt to project his delusions to the outside world through a legal battle rather than repenting his sins.

Kim Dong-hwan's most difficult claim to understand is the factual inquiry into the 'list of persons requesting personal protection' that he applied to the Busan Police Agency. He elaborated on the fact that his colleagues, who predicted his murder, requested personal protection from the police immediately after the incident, calling this 'circumstantial evidence' that his crime was justified. The logic is that they applied for personal protection knowing in advance that they would be retaliated against because they had done something wrong. However, this is only an exercise of victims' natural defense rights to protect themselves from the perpetrator's crime, and can never be the cause of the crime. The court drew the line that it would strictly review whether this argument could serve as a basis for taking into account actual sentencing.

At the bottom of this incident lies the deep-rooted paranoia of the perpetrator, a former Air Force intelligence officer. He was obsessed with the delusion that the organization had intentionally slandered him, caused his health problems, and pressured him to resign. However, as a result of the actual police investigation, no evidence was confirmed that the victims systematically harassed him. This suggests that the perpetrator's own distorted world view is a variant of the typical 'no-questions-asked crime' that led to the terrible result of actual human casualties. Experts warn of how devastating the social repercussions can be when these types of criminals mistake their delusions for reality and attack others.