This study looked at the characteristics of judicial violence as a national crime and reflected what issues could be highlighted from the victimological perspective, focusing on the manipulation of the Jindo Family Spy Case, which is a typical one of illegal and unjustified judicial violence incidents. Among the victimological issues shown in the above cases are 1) the weighting of victims’ pain caused by progress in victimization stages; 2) the re-production structure of judicial violence due to human existential limitations; 3) the justification of judicial violence through the adoption of leading ideologies; 4) the delay in recovery of damages caused by the opposition based on the completion of the extinction prescription. To improve the court's trial work for preventing similar types of judicial violence from occurring, this author recommended several policy proposals, including 1) imposing legal responsibility on judges involved in judicial violence rulings, 2) seeking to resolve the issue of the opposition based on the completion of the extinction prescription, 3) searching for the proper interpretation methodology of re-examination to expand the scope of protection of victims, and 4) studying civil control measures against the court’s arbitrary trial. Judges are apt to be insensitive to the suffering of victims of judicial violence because they do not take legal responsibility for the rulings they have made under the banner of judicial independence and because they are outside the control of the people who are sovereign. Therefore, in order to prevent future victimization due to illegal and unjust judicial violence, proper measures should be actively implemented for judges to be taken responsibility for their interpretation and application of the law.