10(Non-prosecution):2(Prosecution):2(Withdrawal)...Supreme Prosecutors' Office Department Chiefs Meeting Concludes 'Han Myeong-suk Perjury' Non-prosecution (Comprehensive)

Vote After 11-Hour Marathon Meeting

On the 19th, a vehicle carrying the high prosecutor entered the Supreme Prosecutors' Office in Seocho-gu, Seoul, where the meeting of the Deputy Prosecutor General and High Prosecutors for the retrial of the 'Han Myeong-suk perjury suspicion' case was held. This meeting was convened following the exercise of investigative command authority by Minister of Justice Park Beom-gye on the 17th, and it will reconsider the presence of perjury suspicion charges and the decision to prosecute related to former Prime Minister Han Myeong-suk's political funds law violation case. Photo by Kim Hyun-min kimhyun81@

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin] Following the investigative directive from Minister of Justice Park Beom-gye, the Prosecutor General’s Office held a meeting of the Deputy Prosecutors General on the 19th and concluded that witness Kim, accused of perjury obstruction in the trial of former Prime Minister Han Myeong-sook, should not be prosecuted.

In a marathon meeting lasting over 11 hours, a vote was held in which 10 out of 14 attendees, including high prosecutors and deputy prosecutors general (chief prosecutors), expressed opinions in favor of non-prosecution.

According to the legal community on the 20th, the meeting of the Deputy Prosecutors General, which began at 10:05 a.m. the previous day, ended at 11:32 p.m. The meeting time, excluding meal breaks, lasted over 11 hours.

After reviewing the records in the morning, the high prosecutors and deputy prosecutors general engaged in full-scale discussions from the afternoon.

Under Minister Park’s investigative directive, Heo Jeong-su, Head of Inspection Division 3, who was the lead prosecutor and dismissed the case as no charges, and Lim Eun-jeong, Research Officer of the Inspection Policy Bureau at the Prosecutor General’s Office, who led the case handling before the lead prosecutor was assigned, each presented their positions, followed by a Q&A session with the attendees.

Prosecutors from the investigation team at the time, including Um Hee-jun, Head of Criminal Division 3 at Changwon District Prosecutors’ Office, also attended and reportedly emphasized that there was no perjury obstruction coaching.

In the vote held after the discussion, Acting Prosecutor General Cho Nam-gwan, along with six frontline high prosecutors?Cho Sang-chul, Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office; Oh In-seo, Suwon High Prosecutors’ Office; Kang Nam-il, Daejeon High Prosecutors’ Office; Jang Young-soo, Daegu High Prosecutors’ Office; Park Sung-jin, Busan High Prosecutors’ Office; and Koo Bon-seon, Gwangju High Prosecutors’ Office?and seven deputy prosecutors general?Jo Jong-tae, Director of Planning and Coordination; Shin Sung-sik, Head of Anti-Corruption and Violent Crime Division; Lee Jung-hyun, Head of Public Investigation Division; Lee Jong-geun, Head of Criminal Division; Ko Kyung-soon, Head of Trial and Litigation Division; Lee Cheol-hee, Head of Scientific Investigation Division; and Han Dong-soo, Head of Inspection Division?participated, totaling 14 members.

Among them, 10 expressed opinions for non-prosecution, 2 for prosecution, and the remaining 2 abstained.

Acting Prosecutor General Cho will make the final decision on whether to prosecute based on the results of this meeting. Given the overwhelming majority’s opinion for non-prosecution, it is expected that the final opinion will be organized as non-prosecution before the statute of limitations expires on the 22nd.

Earlier, on the 17th, Minister Park issued an investigative directive ordering the Prosecutor General’s Office to hold a meeting of the Deputy Prosecutors General to review the presence of perjury obstruction charges against Kim and the possibility of prosecution.

Although Minister Park’s directive was not a direct order to prosecute, he explained the background by stating, “Several problems such as arbitrary case assignments and irrational decision-making processes emerged during the handling of the case, and it was judged necessary to correct these.” Since he instructed the application of the principle of comprehensive offense to testimonies even beyond the statute of limitations, it can be seen as a de facto directive to prosecute.

Most deputy prosecutors general were classified as pro-government figures appointed during former Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae’s tenure, so it was expected that the meeting would conclude in line with Minister Park’s intentions.

However, Acting Prosecutor General Cho, based on Article 5, Paragraph 2 of the Prosecutor General’s Office regulations titled “Guidelines on the Operation of Consultative Bodies for Rational Decision-Making,” which states that the Deputy Prosecutors General’s meeting is composed of the Prosecutor General, Deputy Prosecutor General, and Deputy Prosecutors General, but the Prosecutor General may allow some high prosecutors or other officials to attend, invited six high prosecutors to the meeting. Minister Park accepted this, turning the situation into an unpredictable phase.

Nevertheless, in the actual vote, except for one inspection division head who likely voted for prosecution, only one other participant expressed a prosecution opinion, while the majority of high prosecutors and deputy prosecutors general attending the meeting opposed prosecuting Kim, resulting in a large margin.

Acting Prosecutor General Cho explained the reason for inviting frontline high prosecutors to the meeting, stating, “There are concerns inside and outside the prosecution that a meeting of only deputy prosecutors general is insufficient to guarantee fairness. Since the case and legal principles are complex and the records extensive, we invited frontline high prosecutors who have rich experience and insight in case handling and represent the collective intelligence within the prosecution to participate in the Deputy Prosecutors General’s meeting to enhance fairness and the maturity of deliberations.”

With Minister Park’s first investigative directive effectively failing, tensions between the Ministry of Justice and the prosecution are expected to intensify further. It is widely anticipated that when a successor to Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl is appointed, Minister Park will carry out a large-scale personnel reshuffle.

The allegations of perjury obstruction and coaching in the trial of former Prime Minister Han stem from the 2011 trial on violations of the Political Funds Act, where former Hanshin Construction CEO Han Man-ho reversed his testimony in court that he gave money to former Prime Minister Han. The investigation team is suspected of coaching Kim and other inmates who were imprisoned with Han Man-ho to commit perjury.

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