Why is the Disciplinary Investigation and Punishment of Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong Jin-woong in the 'Han Dong-hoon Assault' Case Delayed... Possible Wait for Criminal Trial Outcome

"Majority Opinion Calls for Immediate Suspension and Disciplinary Action" Amidst Views to "Wait for Trial Outcome"
Minister Choo Mi-ae May Hold Off Disciplinary Action Until Criminal Conviction
Prosecutor General Has 'Right to Request Suspension,' but Minister Can Act Independently

Prosecutor General Han Dong-hoon (left) and Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong Jin-woong of Gwangju District Prosecutors' Office [Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin] Interest is focusing on the background of the delayed announcement of the disciplinary inspection results for Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong Jin-ung of the Gwangju District Prosecutors' Office, who was indicted on the 27th for assaulting Chief Prosecutor Han Dong-hoon during a search related to the investigation of the 'alleged collusion between prosecutors and media,' causing injuries requiring three weeks of medical treatment (violation of the Act on Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes for official violence).

Since the matter itself is straightforward and the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office (Chief Prosecutor Cho Sang-chul), which conducted both the disciplinary inspection and investigation of Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong, has already confirmed the facts and completed legal review and indictment, there is no particular reason to delay. However, even a week after the indictment, no disciplinary request or suspension from duty has been made against Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong, leading to various speculations around the prosecution.

Facts Confirmed and Legal Review Completed... No Reason for Disciplinary Inspection Delay

According to the Ministry of Justice and the prosecution on the 4th, the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department (Head Han Dong-soo) is currently in consultation with the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office regarding the disciplinary inspection of Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong.

However, it has been confirmed that the records related to the disciplinary inspection and investigation of Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong have not yet been transferred to the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department. The Seoul High Prosecutors' Office stated that they are consulting with the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department on the timing of record transfer. Both sides remain silent about the reasons for the prolonged consultation between the Supreme Prosecutors' Office and the High Prosecutors' Office.

This case is related to the 'alleged collusion between prosecutors and media,' from which Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae excluded Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl's investigative command authority. Therefore, the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office had not provided interim reports on the disciplinary inspection and investigation of Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong to the Supreme Prosecutors' Office.

However, since the Prosecutor General holds the authority to request disciplinary action or suspension from duty under the Prosecutors' Disciplinary Act, the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department must complete the review of the records and make a final report to Prosecutor General Yoon, who can then take specific measures such as requesting disciplinary action from the Ministry of Justice.

Attention is focused on what disciplinary inspection results Head Han, who has clashed several times with Prosecutor General Yoon over inspections related to the Han Myeong-sook case, will present regarding Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong.

Prosecutors Mostly Agree on Immediate Suspension... Some Differing Opinions

Prosecutor A said, "Since there were no interim reports so far, I think the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department needs at least some time to review the related records," but added, "However, the facts are extremely simple and clear, and there is no particular reason for legal review to take time, so this delay seems strange."

Prosecutor B said, "Usually, disciplinary inspections precede investigations, but I understand this case involves simultaneous disciplinary inspection and investigation," adding, "In any case, investigations are stronger, and since the indictment was made based on the investigation's recognition of charges, disciplinary action cannot be avoided."

There were also criticisms that not transferring or suspending Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong, who was indicted on charges of 'official violence' related to his duties, is unfair compared to Chief Prosecutor Han.

Prosecutor C said, "Minister Choo suspended Chief Prosecutor Han from duty and demoted him to Jincheon based on mere suspicion. Chief Prosecutor Han has not even been indicted yet, but Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong, who has already been indicted for duty-related charges, should naturally be suspended or disciplined for fairness."

Of course, there were prosecutors with different opinions.

Prosecutor D said, "It has been generally accepted that prosecutors or investigators may use some physical force to restrain resisting subjects during searches," adding, "There is room to view the indictment as an overextension of legal application."

However, in this case, according to what has been reported so far, Chief Prosecutor Han was not resisting during the search, and Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong misunderstood Han's handing over and manipulating his phone to communicate with his lawyer as an attempt to delete information stored on the phone, leading him to physically intervene. This differs from the usual situations Prosecutor D mentioned.

Meanwhile, regarding the MBC report the previous day that "the Seoul High Prosecutors' Office reassigned the case from the chief prosecutor who held a skeptical view on Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong's indictment to Inspection Department Head Myung Jeom-sik and then proceeded with the indictment," a Seoul High Prosecutors' Office official explained, "It is true that the case was reassigned, but the chief prosecutor was not in favor of non-indictment."

Another Seoul High Prosecutors' Office official also said, "There were detailed differences of opinion among prosecutors, but as far as I know, there was not a single inspection prosecutor who believed Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong should be non-indicted."

Under Prosecutors' Disciplinary Act, Minister Appoints All Disciplinary Committee Members Except Ex Officio Minister and Vice Minister

Meanwhile, Article 3(Types of Discipline) Paragraph 1 of the Prosecutors' Disciplinary Act lists five types of disciplinary actions against prosecutors: dismissal, removal, suspension, salary reduction, and reprimand.

Regarding official violence, Article 125 of the Criminal Act stipulates that persons performing duties related to detention, such as prosecutors or police officers, who assault criminal suspects, shall be punished more severely than ordinary assault, with imprisonment of up to five years or disqualification for up to ten years.

Additionally, Article 4-2(Aggravated Punishment for Arrest, Detention, etc.) Paragraph 1 of the Act on Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes states that if official violence under Article 125 of the Criminal Act causes injury, the punishment shall be aggravated to imprisonment for not less than one year.

The charge applied to Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong is official violence under the Act on Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes, which, according to the prosecution's allegations, naturally warrants severe disciplinary action such as dismissal.

According to the Prosecutors' Disciplinary Act, the Prosecutor General may request disciplinary review in writing to the Ministry of Justice Prosecutors' Disciplinary Committee for prosecutors who have committed acts constituting grounds for discipline such as breach of duty or damage to dignity.

The Prosecutors' Disciplinary Committee consists of seven members, including the chairperson (the Minister of Justice), and three alternate members.

Disciplinary resolutions require a majority vote of the members present, including the chairperson. The committee members include the Minister, Vice Minister, two prosecutors appointed by the Minister, a lawyer appointed by the Minister, a law professor appointed by the Minister, and a person with rich academic knowledge and experience appointed by the Minister. The three alternate members are also prosecutors appointed by the Minister, meaning that except for the ex officio Minister and Vice Minister, all members are appointed or designated by the Minister.

Regarding suspension from duty, the Prosecutors' Disciplinary Act allows the Minister of Justice to order suspension of duty for the accused when deemed necessary. In such cases, the suspended prosecutor may be assigned to other prosecutorial offices or institutions affiliated with the Ministry of Justice, such as the Judicial Research and Training Institute, for a period not exceeding two months.

The Prosecutor General may request the Minister of Justice to suspend the duty of a prosecutor under investigation if disciplinary charges are expected and continuing duty is deemed significantly inappropriate.

In other words, Prosecutor General Yoon has the authority to request suspension of Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong's duty from Minister Choo, but independently, Minister Choo can also order suspension and reassignment of Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong.

In fact, when the 'alleged collusion between prosecutors and media' surfaced in June, Minister Choo suspended Chief Prosecutor Han, who was then Deputy Chief Prosecutor (Chief Prosecutor) of the Busan High Prosecutors' Office, and reassigned him as a research fellow at the Judicial Research and Training Institute without a request from Prosecutor General Yoon. In late September, Minister Choo also instructed Chief Prosecutor Han, who was working at the Yongin branch of the Judicial Research and Training Institute, to report to the main institute in Jincheon, his original reassignment location.

Disciplining Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong Would Be an Admission of Minister Choo's Misstep in Investigative Command... Disciplinary Action May Be Delayed Until Criminal Trial Verdict

The problem is that disciplining Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong could appear as Minister Choo admitting that her investigative command was mistaken.

Previously, Minister Choo excluded Prosecutor General Yoon's investigative command authority in the investigation of the 'alleged collusion between prosecutors and media' involving Chief Prosecutor Han and supported Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office Chief Lee Sung-yoon, who proceeded with the investigation as if Han's complicity was a given fact.

However, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office was embarrassed once when it indicted former Channel A reporter Lee Dong-jae without mentioning any conspiracy with Chief Prosecutor Han, and months after indicting Lee, there has been no progress in the investigation of Chief Prosecutor Han.

In this situation, it is not easy for Minister Choo to discipline Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong, who was at the forefront of the investigation.

Therefore, there is speculation around the prosecution that even if Prosecutor General Yoon requests disciplinary action against Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong, the Ministry of Justice Prosecutors' Disciplinary Committee, where Minister Choo can influence all members, may postpone disciplinary decisions until the conclusion of Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong's criminal trial.

Earlier, the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department, led by Head Han Dong-soo, might recommend to Prosecutor General Yoon to withhold disciplinary requests for Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong, citing disagreements over the establishment of the 'official violence' charge in this case.

The trial for Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong's official violence charge is scheduled for the first pretrial conference on the 19th of next month at the Seoul Central District Court Criminal Division 22 (Presiding Judge Yang Cheol-han).

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