[2020 National Audit] Sharp Remarks Pour Out... Yoon's 'Point-by-Point Rebuttal' Appears After One Year

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] On the 22nd, Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol appeared at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office National Assembly inspection and directly refuted various allegations surrounding the prosecution and himself. Prosecutor General Yoon confidently responded to numerous questions on current issues that poured in at the start of the inspection, continuing to express his candid opinions. He systematically rebutted claims such as the 'passive investigation of the opposition' pointed out by Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae, and also personally conveyed the news of Park Soon-cheol, head of the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors' Office, who tendered his resignation that day, supporting Park's reason for stepping down that "politics has overshadowed the prosecution."

According to the Supreme Prosecutors' Office on that day, Prosecutor General Yoon prepared materials and organized his stance with each department head within the office until late the previous night in preparation for the inspection. Besides major issues such as the Lime and Optimus case investigations, personal matters concerning Prosecutor General Yoon expected to be raised during the inspection were also addressed, including the bribery case related to sponsorship funds under the name of Kobana, from which Minister Choo excluded Yoon's investigative command, the Deutsche Motors-related stock manipulation case, the complaint case related to nursing hospital operations, and the bribery case involving the former head of the Yongsan Tax Office.

The biggest issue was undoubtedly the Lime and Optimus scandals. In the case of the Lime scandal, after the prison revelations by Kim Bong-hyun, former chairman of Star Mobility and a key figure, both ruling and opposition parties criticized the prosecution's investigation, leading to fierce disputes from the start. In particular, the ruling party focused on questioning Prosecutor General Yoon's involvement in the Lime lobbying allegations. A representative suspicion was that although Yoon was specifically informed about misconduct by opposition politicians and prosecutors, he did not command a thorough investigation as he did with ruling party figures. It was also raised whether the prosecution received specific reports about entertainment and hospitality provided to active prosecutors but omitted related reports or investigations, and whether Yoon passively allowed a prosecutor who received such hospitality to lead the investigation team.

Prosecutor General Yoon had already strongly denied these matters with somewhat harsh remarks calling them 'slander and false accusations,' and he showed no change in stance during the inspection. However, since an official setting allows for additional explanations, there is a possibility he will systematically rebut the Lime lobbying allegations further.

The Optimus scandal presents a somewhat different situation. Although it began with lobbying allegations like Lime, new suspicions have emerged dating back to Yoon's time as head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office. In fact, the Central District Prosecutors' Office decided not to indict Kim Jae-hyun, CEO of Optimus Asset Management, and Jung Young-je, head of Optimus Asset Management Alternative Investments, in May of the following year after the Korea Radio Promotion Association requested an investigation into embezzlement and breach of trust by Optimus-related parties in January 2018.

The ruling party, which was on the defensive after the disclosure of documents containing lists of political and government figures, used this point as a shield. Their argument is that if a proper investigation had been conducted at the time and no non-indictment decision made, the current damages would not have occurred. Prosecutor General Yoon reportedly reviewed this case again during the preparation for the inspection with his aides the previous day. Details about the non-indictment decision process are expected to come from Yoon himself.

The investigations related to Prosecutor General Yoon's family, which he takes most sensitively, are in a state where counterattacks are possible. These include suspicions of increased sponsorship funds for a company operated by Yoon's wife Kim, allegations of stock manipulation of Deutsche Motors by Kim, suspicions of illegal operation of a nursing hospital involving his mother-in-law Choi, and allegations of lobbying in the investigation of former Yongsan Tax Office head Yoon Woo-jin. These were cases where Minister Choo had exercised her investigative command. However, most of these allegations were previously dismissed as "completely uncredible political attacks" by ruling party lawmakers during Yoon's National Assembly confirmation hearing last year. Since these matters were already scrutinized during the confirmation hearing, Prosecutor General Yoon may use this fact to his advantage.

Additionally, during the inspection, Prosecutor General Yoon's stance on Minister Choo's exercise of investigative command is expected to be further heard. The day before, Minister Choo publicly criticized Yoon on Facebook, stating, "The Prosecutor General should have first reflected and apologized."

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