"Serious Nature of Crime"... Jeong Gyeong-sim Sentenced to 4 Years in Prison and Taken into Custody (Comprehensive)

4 Years Imprisonment and 500 Million Won Fine... All Guilty in Admission Fraud Case

[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] Jung Kyung-shim, a professor at Dongyang University and wife of former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk, who was indicted on charges related to her children's admission fraud and private equity fund investments, was sentenced to four years in prison in the first trial and was detained in court. A fine of 140 million won was imposed.

On the 23rd, the Criminal Division 25-2 of the Seoul Central District Court (Presiding Judges Im Jeong-yeop, Kwon Seong-su, Kim Seon-hee) sentenced Professor Jung to four years in prison and a fine of 500 million won. Following the prison sentence, Professor Jung was detained in court and is scheduled to be held at the Seoul Southern Detention Center.

On this day, the court recognized all charges of admission fraud against Professor Jung. The court stated, "All certificates, including the experiential activities at Dankook University Medical Science Research Institute, are false," and added, "The defendant actively participated in submitting self-introduction letters and certificates of commendation to medical graduate schools, and all charges related to admission fraud are guilty."

Regarding the contentious Dongyang University certificate of commendation, the court found that "there is sufficient evidence to prove forgery." The claim that Professor Jung could not have forged it because she did not know how to use a computer was not accepted.

Some charges related to the private equity fund allegations and evidence destruction were acquitted. The core of the private equity fund investment charges involved investing 1 billion won with Cho Beom-dong, a fifth cousin of former Minister Cho, and embezzling approximately 157 million won of Korink PE funds under the pretext of profits. It also included submitting false reports to financial authorities, claiming an additional 1.4 billion won was paid into the Blue Fund managed by Korink PE, making the capital appear to be around 10 billion won.

However, the court acquitted the charge of submitting false reports about the Blue Fund's capital. It judged that the false reports were acts of Korink PE's management staff and found it difficult to recognize Professor Jung's involvement. The court explained, "The 1 billion won that Mr. Cho received from the defendant was all investment money," but added, "It is difficult to see that she orchestrated or urged the embezzlement of Korink PE funds."

The court gave different interpretations for charges of evidence destruction, forgery, and concealment. The allegation that Professor Jung instructed Korink PE employees to forge fund operation reports was judged as "not proven beyond a reasonable doubt," and the part about ordering asset manager Kim Kyung-rok to conceal materials from Dongyang University’s office was ruled as "not punishable under the crime of evidence concealment instruction."

On this day, the court strongly criticized Professor Jung. The court stated, "Considering the increasingly bold methods of the crime, the nature of the offense is very bad," and added, "It caused negative consequences that betray the trust and expectations our society had in the admission system, making the possibility of criticism very high." It further pointed out, "Despite having a legal obligation to faithfully report assets under the Public Officials Ethics Act, she used others' accounts to increase her and her family's assets, used undisclosed information, and concealed criminal proceeds," calling it "a serious crime that disrupts market order."

Meanwhile, Professor Jung’s legal team strongly opposed the first trial verdict. Her side said, "We were taken aback by today's sentencing. While we find it difficult to agree with the overall judgment, including the admission fraud part, the sentencing, and the reasons for detention, the defense team cannot accept the statements made and will contest the case in the High Court." They added, "Although all admission fraud charges were found guilty, prejudgments and speculations that we fought against from the investigation stage were mixed into the court's sentencing," and expressed disappointment, saying, "None of the extensive evidentiary efforts during the trial were reflected, and rather, all charges were recognized as guilty exactly as the prosecution argued."

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