Court Sentences Former Minister Cho Kuk's Brother Cho Kwon to 3 Years in Prison in Appeal Trial... Guilty of Attempted Breach of Trust, Harboring a Criminal, and Violating Labor Standards Act (Comprehensive)

Sentence Increased by 2 Years as Charges Reversed After First Trial Acquittal
Kim Miri Chief Judge's First Trial Sentence, Previously Lower Than Accomplices, Likely to Spark Controversy

On September 18 last year, Jo Gwon, the younger brother of former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk, who was indicted on charges including false litigation and teacher recruitment corruption, is attending the first trial sentencing hearing at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul. Photo by Kim Hyun-min kimhyun81@

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] Jo Kwon, the younger brother of former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk, who was sentenced to one year in prison in the first trial for charges including recruitment corruption related to Woongdong Academy, was sentenced to three years in prison in the appellate trial.

The Criminal Division 3 of the Seoul High Court (Presiding Judge Park Yeon-wook, Kim Kyu-dong, Lee Hee-jun) on the 26th, in the appellate trial sentencing hearing for Jo, who was charged with obstruction of business and other charges, recognized guilt for obstruction of business, which was acknowledged in the first trial, as well as for violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes (attempted breach of trust in business) and some charges of aiding a criminal, which were acquitted in the first trial, and also for violation of the Labor Standards Act newly added in the appellate trial, sentencing him to three years in prison. The fine of 147 million KRW was maintained as in the first trial.

The court stated, "Although the defendant was the secretary-general managing the real estate of Woongdong Academy, he fabricated false documents related to construction and used them to file a lawsuit worth about 5 billion KRW, winning the case. Afterward, he borrowed 1.4 billion KRW for his business funds by providing this claim as collateral, causing the basic property of Woongdong Academy to be provisionally seized, yet he did not even raise an objection, thereby putting Woongdong Academy at risk of damage." The court added, "This is a breach of trust and the nature of the crime is very serious."

The court further said, "The defendant also obstructed the recruitment work of Woongdong Academy teachers through deception," and added, "Considering the amount of money received and the degree of obstruction, the culpability is by no means light."

It continued, "By turning the position of teachers, which plays an important role in the education system, into a commodity that can be bought with money for economic embezzlement, the nature of the crime is bad," and pointed out, "Due to this crime, trust in Woongdong Middle School and other private school teachers has been damaged, and those who participated in the recruitment believing it would be conducted fairly were left with frustration and disappointment."

Attempted breach of trust related to 'false lawsuit' acquitted in first trial recognized as guilty... However, court judged no likelihood of actual damage occurring

The court recognized some of Jo's charges related to a disguised lawsuit against Woongdong Academy, which were acquitted in the first trial, as guilty.

Jo is accused of creating a false construction contract in October 2006 to secure a payment claim, then filing disguised lawsuits against Woongdong Academy in 2006 and 2017 based on this, causing the school corporation a loss of 11.5501 billion KRW.

Previously, the first trial acquitted Jo, stating that intent to breach trust could not be recognized.

However, the appellate court judged that Jo's fabrication of construction-related contracts and confirmation of a false claim worth about 5.1 billion KRW through false lawsuits, then providing it as collateral to borrow 1.4 billion KRW, created a possibility of damage to Woongdong Academy, thus constituting attempted breach of trust in business.

The court recognized it as an attempt because Woongdong Academy could remove the risk of damage caused by provisional seizure registration through civil execution procedures, so the possibility of actual damage was deemed unlikely.

Regarding the claim for assignment lawsuit filed by Jo in February 2017, the court judged that since the claim's purpose, cause, and parties were all the same, the subject matter of the lawsuit was identical, and the claim was not expanded, it constituted a non-punishable subsequent act of breach of trust through the first lawsuit.

Even though the statute of limitations for the prior breach of trust through the first claim for assignment lawsuit had expired, making prosecution impossible, the court ruled that the punishability of the subsequent breach of trust, which is a non-punishable subsequent act, cannot be restored.

All charges of violation of the Labor Standards Act newly added in the appellate trial found guilty... In hypothetical concurrence with first trial's acquittal on bribery of breach of trust

Additionally, the court found all charges related to violation of the Labor Standards Act, newly added by the prosecution's amendment of the indictment in the appellate trial concerning recruitment corruption, guilty.

Jo is accused of receiving a total of 180 million KRW from two applicants while working as secretary-general of Woongdong Academy during 2016-2017 in the process of hiring social studies teachers at Woongdong Middle School, and providing them with exam questions and answer sheets.

In the first trial, the court recognized guilt for obstruction of business related to this but acquitted Jo of bribery of breach of trust, reasoning that Jo could not be considered a "person handling another's affairs," the subject of breach of trust, as he was the secretary-general managing property, not the person in charge of teacher recruitment.

However, the appellate court judged that Jo's bribery of breach of trust and violation of the Labor Standards Act are in a hypothetical concurrence relationship (where one act corresponds to multiple crimes simultaneously). Article 40 of the Criminal Act stipulates that in cases of hypothetical concurrence, punishment shall be according to the most serious crime.

During the trial, Jo's side argued that the prosecution's amendment of the indictment to add charges was an abuse of prosecution rights. However, the court ruled that the application to amend the indictment to add charges in hypothetical concurrence with the bribery of breach of trust acquitted in the first trial was lawful.

The court also judged that Jo, together with accomplices, receiving 180 million KRW from two teacher applicants and influencing the start of the employment relationship constitutes a violation of Article 9 of the Labor Standards Act.

Article 9 of the Labor Standards Act (Prohibition of Intermediary Exploitation) states, "No one shall, without legal authority, intervene in another person's employment for profit or obtain benefits as an intermediary." Violation of this is punishable under Article 107 of the same law by imprisonment of up to five years or a fine of up to 50 million KRW.

Guilty of aiding a criminal... Acquitted of charges of evading compulsory execution and instructing evidence destruction

The appellate court also overturned the first trial's acquittal on some charges of aiding a criminal and found Jo guilty.

Meanwhile, charges of evading compulsory execution and instructing evidence destruction, acquitted in the first trial, were also acquitted in the appellate trial. The court regarded the evading compulsory execution charge as a non-punishable subsequent act related to the lawsuit filed in February 2017. Regarding instructing evidence destruction, the court judged that Jo played a key and leading role throughout the evidence destruction process and was a co-principal by functional act control sharing the role. The Criminal Act does not punish destruction of evidence related to one's own crime. Jo is accused of instructing Woongdong Academy officials to destroy evidence related to the disguised lawsuit.

Previously, the Seoul Central District Court Criminal Division 21 (Presiding Judge Kim Mi-ri), which handled the first trial, recognized only one charge of obstruction of business related to providing exam questions and answer sheets to two teacher applicants among six charges against Jo, and acquitted him of the other five charges including breach of trust under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes, bribery of breach of trust, evading compulsory execution, instructing evidence destruction, and aiding a criminal.

In particular, controversy arose as Jo, the main culprit of recruitment corruption, received a lighter sentence than his accomplice Park.

In the appellate trial, with the prosecution's amendment of the indictment adding violation of the Labor Standards Act, all seven charges were tried.

At the prosecution's closing argument in the appellate trial, they stated, "The defendant's family privatized Woongdong Academy, created false claims with fabricated evidence, and bought and sold teaching positions for economic gain," and requested the same six-year prison sentence as in the first trial.

Jo, who was initially detained during the investigation, was released on bail during the first trial but was sentenced to imprisonment and detained in court during the first trial. However, he was released after serving the sentence during the appellate trial.

However, on this day, the court revoked Jo's bail decision, and he will face the Supreme Court trial while detained again.

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