If the Lee Seong-yoon Prosecutor's Office Case is Transferred to the National Police Agency, the Central District Prosecutors' Office Will Have Jurisdiction... "Self-Approval, a Comedic Matter"

PCA, Prosecution, and National Police Agency... The Lost Path of Kim Hak-ui's Exit Ban Case
Kim Jin-wook, PCA Chief: "Will Announce Tomorrow (12th)"
Legal Circles Favor 'Re-referral to Suwon District Prosecutors' Office'

Lee Seong-yoon, Chief Prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office.
[Photo by Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin] The investigative authority over Lee Seong-yoon, the head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, who is suspected of obstructing the investigation into Prosecutor Lee Gyu-won and others accused of illegal acts such as falsifying official documents during the emergency travel ban process against former Deputy Minister of Justice Kim Hak-ui, will soon be decided.

This decision is attracting attention as it could set an important precedent in interpreting Articles 24 and 25 of the High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Office (HOCI) Act, which governs the relationship between HOCI and other investigative agencies such as the prosecution and police.

On the 3rd, HOCI, having received the case from Suwon District Prosecutors' Office, has been considering three options: ▲ direct investigation by HOCI ▲ re-referral to Suwon District Prosecutors' Office ▲ referral to the National Police Agency's National Investigation Headquarters (NIH).

On the 11th, HOCI Chief Kim Jin-wook, when asked by reporters about the decision on referral while arriving at the Government Complex Gwacheon, stated, "We plan to announce it tomorrow (the 12th)."

Initially, upon receiving the case, Chief Kim mentioned, "The chief and deputy chief are legal professionals, and there are 10 dispatched investigators, so HOCI is not in a situation lacking investigative capability," hinting at the possibility of a direct investigation. However, he later opened the possibility of re-referral to the prosecution or referral to the police, causing some confusion.

Within legal circles, the prevailing view is that the case is likely to be re-referred to Suwon District Prosecutors' Office.

Article 25, Paragraph 2 of the HOCI Act stipulates that "if an investigative agency other than HOCI discovers allegations of crimes by high-ranking officials, the head of that agency must refer the case to HOCI." However, since the personnel committee for recommending HOCI prosecutors has not yet convened, it is practically difficult for HOCI to immediately commence an investigation.

In a statement issued on the day Suwon District Prosecutors' Office referred the case to HOCI, Prosecutor Lee Seong-yoon argued that Article 24, Paragraph 3, which states, "The chief may refer the case to another investigative agency if it is deemed appropriate for that agency to investigate crimes by high-ranking officials considering the suspect, victim, and the nature and scale of the case," is a general referral provision, whereas Article 25, Paragraph 2 is a special provision concerning prosecutors, thus "HOCI, having received the case from the prosecution, cannot re-refer the case back to the prosecution."

However, the dominant opinion is that interpreting Article 24, Paragraph 3, which allows the HOCI chief to refer cases to other investigative agencies, as excluding re-referral is unreasonable. Chief Kim has also mentioned the possibility of re-referral to the prosecution.

Meanwhile, referring the case to the NIH also poses problems.

Active prosecutor A pointed out, "Through the adjustment of investigative authority between prosecution and police, lower-level public officials are investigated by the police, high-ranking officials of grade 3 or above by the prosecution, and prosecutors by HOCI. Sending this case to the police would nullify these investigative authority adjustment regulations."

Senior prosecutor B remarked, "If the NIH investigates Prosecutor Lee Seong-yoon, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, which has jurisdiction over the police agency, would be involved. For example, if arrest warrants or search warrants need to be applied for, they would have to be submitted to the Central District Prosecutors' Office, creating a comical situation where the person involved in the case receives reports and approvals on their own case."

Although internal prosecutorial ethical codes require self-recusal in cases with potential conflicts of interest, it is indeed inappropriate for the Central District Prosecutors' Office to be involved in investigating its own chief.

Previously, Prosecutor Lee appeared at Suwon District Prosecutors' Office and underwent several investigations. However, Prosecutor Lee Seong-yoon did not respond to three summons and submitted a written statement on February 26.

Typically, if a suspect ignores three summons from the prosecution, an arrest warrant is issued for compulsory summons. Prosecutor Lee Seong-yoon, aware of this, reportedly coordinated with the investigative team to be questioned on a convenient day and place between February 27 and March 1, during the weekend and holidays.

However, on February 26, Prosecutor Lee Seong-yoon sent a statement to reporters revealing the gist of the written statement submitted to the prosecution, asserting that the jurisdiction over his case lies with HOCI, thereby clearly indicating his refusal to comply with the prosecution's summons.

Suwon District Prosecutors' Office judged that although it is unclear at which stage cases involving prosecutors should be referred under the HOCI Act, there could be legal controversies regarding compulsory investigations such as arrest warrant requests, and thus referred the case to HOCI.

Therefore, if the case is re-referred to Suwon District Prosecutors' Office, it is highly likely that summons for Prosecutor Lee Seong-yoon will be pursued again.

Meanwhile, there has been criticism of the somewhat absurd situation where Prosecutor Lee Seong-yoon and Prosecutor Lee openly wish to be investigated by HOCI.

Attorney C, a former chief prosecutor, said, "It is ridiculous for a chief prosecutor or prosecutor, even mentioned as a candidate for the next Prosecutor General, to distrust their own prosecution and request investigation by HOCI." He added, "If HOCI takes over the case as they expect and either dismisses it or scapegoats, HOCI will be embroiled in political neutrality controversies before it is properly established."

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