Each Verdict Varies on 'Abuse of Authority Crime'; Guidelines to Be Issued

Prosecutors Keenly Await Supreme Court Plenary Verdict on Kim Ki-chun and Cho Yoon-sun's 'Blacklist' Case
If Broadly Recognized, It Boosts Indictment Decision; If Discretion Acknowledged, It Imposes Restraint

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyung-min] The prosecution is on high alert for the Supreme Court's full bench ruling, which will present specific guidelines on the crime of 'abuse of authority.' The outcome of the ruling could change the direction of the ongoing investigations into the current administration.

According to legal circles on the 29th, officials from the prosecution investigation team are closely monitoring the Supreme Court full bench's decision scheduled for the afternoon of the 30th regarding the abuse of authority charges against former Presidential Chief of Staff Kim Ki-chun and former Minister of Culture, Sports and Tourism Cho Yoon-sun. Kim and Cho are accused of compiling a blacklist of cultural and artistic figures during the Park Geun-hye administration.

The crime of abuse of authority has been controversial due to differing rulings in lower courts. Article 123 of the Criminal Act defines abuse of authority as "when a public official abuses their power to compel a person to perform an act they are not obligated to do or obstructs a person's exercise of rights." Courts have issued varying interpretations of terms such as authority, abuse, and obligation, causing confusion. The Supreme Court full bench ruling is expected to clarify these ambiguities.

The Supreme Court's guidelines are also expected to influence the prosecution's investigation direction and indictment decisions in cases involving interference in the Ulsan local elections and allegations of cover-up in the Yoon Jae-soo inspection. The prosecution has applied the abuse of authority charge in both cases. If the Supreme Court full bench sets a broad standard for recognizing abuse of authority, the charges against those involved will become clearer, potentially strengthening the prosecution's decision to indict.

Conversely, the Supreme Court full bench may narrow the scope of abuse of authority, viewing the actions of former Chief of Staff Kim and others as 'political judgment,' thereby recognizing discretionary power. In such a case, the prosecution may find it difficult to proceed with indictments.

Not only ongoing investigations but also current trials will be significantly affected. The trial of former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk is attracting the most attention. Cho faces a total of 11 charges, with abuse of authority being a core issue among them. Similarly, the fate of former President Park Geun-hye, former President Lee Myung-bak, and former Chief Justice Yang Sung-tae, all on trial for abuse of authority charges, could be decided by the Supreme Court full bench's ruling.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.