Jung Kyung-shim Announces Counterattack... "Prosecutor's Claims Can Be Fully Refuted"

Third Trial Date in Two Days... Prosecutor's Evidence Opinions
Many Evidence Adoptions Deferred for Admission Fraud Part
Prosecutor: "Witness Examination Before Written Investigation..."
Presiding Judge Song In-gwon Subject to Regular Personnel Changes

[Asia Economy Reporter Seongpil Cho] Jeong Gyeong-shim, a professor at Dongyang University and wife of former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk, is signaling a counterattack in court on the 5th. Professor Jeong has been on trial since the 22nd of last month, charged with allegations including her children's admission fraud and illegal fund investment. This day marks the third hearing. She is expected to present rebuttal opinions against the evidence presented by the prosecution in previous hearings.

Professor Jeong's Side: "The Trial is Progressing Smoothly"

At the second hearing held on the 31st of last month, the prosecution revealed a text message sent by Professor Jeong to her younger brother before investing in a private equity fund, stating, "My goal is to buy a building in Gangnam." The prosecution presented this message as evidence supporting their claim that she committed financial crimes by pursuing high returns despite having a fiduciary duty.

The prosecution also disclosed text messages between former Minister Cho and Professor Jeong. In a message from June 2017, just before the private equity fund investment, Cho asked Jeong, "How about inheriting 50 million won to our son this time?" The prosecution claims that following this suggestion, Professor Jeong invested 50 million won each in the names of her daughter and son into Kolink PE, operated by Cho Beom-dong, a fifth cousin of her husband. They pointed out, "50 million won is the tax-exempt limit, and this couple used the private equity fund as an opportunity for 'wealth inheritance.' The explanation by former Minister Cho that he did not know the investment destination is also a lie."

Professor Jeong's side has announced plans to rebut these points in the next hearing. Her lawyer stated, "Professor Jeong only intended to lend money to Cho Beom-dong to earn interest income," and added, "At the next hearing, we believe the defense team can sufficiently counter the prosecution focusing on legal issues that differ from the facts." The lawyer also said, "The trial is progressing smoothly."

"We Will Contest Guilt or Innocence Based on Facts and Law"

On the 2nd, Professor Jeong's defense team reiterated this position in a text message to the press corps. In their statement, the defense emphasized, "Professor Jeong's hope to acquire a building in Gangnam is neither morally nor legally condemnable, and the text message expressing this intention cannot be used as evidence proving guilt in the private equity fund-related criminal charges." They also warned, "The 'Nondureong Watch' incident is happening again," and predicted, "We will contest Professor Jeong's guilt or innocence in court based on facts and law."

The term 'Nondureong Watch' originated from media reports during the 2009 prosecution investigation of the late President Roh Moo-hyun, alleging that his wife, Kwon Yang-sook, discarded an expensive watch in a rice paddy. It has since been criticized as a typical example of media shaming or insulting articles and continues to receive condemnation. Professor Jeong's defense team stated, "The prosecution and some media are more focused on criticizing and humiliating Professor Jeong than on her guilt or innocence," and added, "Her guilt or innocence will be judged based on evidence submitted in court."

Cho Kuk Case Not to Be Consolidated... Personnel Changes Could Be a Variable

The trial court for this case, the 25th Criminal Division of the Seoul Central District Court (Chief Judge Song In-kwon), decided not to consolidate Professor Jeong's case with former Minister Cho Kuk's case. The court explained, "There are many differences in content between former Minister Cho's case and this one, and the presiding judge did not agree." The cases involving Cho Kuk's admission fraud, private equity fund, and allegations of halting the investigation into Yoo Jae-soo are currently assigned to the 21st Criminal Division of the Seoul Central District Court (Chief Judge Kim Mi-ri). As a result, Professor Jeong and former Minister Cho, who were indicted as co-conspirators in the admission fraud and private equity fund cases, will be tried by different courts.

However, the upcoming court personnel announcement on the 6th is expected to be a variable in these trials. The presiding judges of these cases, Chief Judge Song In-kwon of the 25th Criminal Division and Chief Judge Kim Mi-ri of the 21st Criminal Division, are rumored to be replaced in this personnel reshuffle. In particular, Chief Judge Song has served in the 25th Criminal Division for three years. Considering that court personnel changes typically occur every two to three years, it is highly likely he will be transferred unless there is an unexpected event. Chief Judge Song also mentioned at a recent hearing, "The presiding judge may change."

The prosecution is known to prefer witness examinations instead of documentary evidence investigations if the trial court for Professor Jeong's case changes. This preference is interpreted as a response to the court's statement at a previous preparatory hearing that it could not accept post-indictment witness statements as evidence. At that time, the court cited Supreme Court rulings and said, "We will exclude evidence unilaterally created using investigative authority." Accordingly, most of the evidence collected by the prosecution regarding the admission fraud part of Professor Jeong's case has not been accepted so far.

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