The Corruption Investigation Office Demands Prosecution in the 'Jo Hee-yeon Case'... 'First Investigation' Concludes After 4 Months (Comprehensive)

PCC "Superintendent Jo obstructed rights exercise and unduly influenced teacher appointments"... Superintendent Jo's side "Requests convening of Prosecutor's Investigation Deliberation Committee"

Superintendent of Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education Cho Hee-yeon, who is suspected of unfair special recruitment of dismissed teachers, is appearing at the High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Department in Gwacheon, Gyeonggi Province on the 27th. / Gwacheon - Photo by Kang Jin-hyung aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] The High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Agency (HCIA) has requested the prosecution to indict Cho Hee-yeon, the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education Superintendent, who is involved in the controversy over the 'special recruitment of dismissed teachers.' This is the investigation conclusion reached four months after the HCIA launched its first case. Superintendent Cho's side immediately protested, stating, "The special recruitment was conducted legally," and "The decision to request prosecution was based solely on prejudice and speculation." Superintendent Cho's side plans to request the convening of the Prosecutor's Investigation Deliberation Committee in the future.

On the 3rd, the HCIA announced that it requested the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office to indict Superintendent Cho and his secretary chief, Mr. A, on charges including abuse of authority and obstruction of the exercise of rights in connection with the investigation into the special recruitment of dismissed teachers by Superintendent Cho.

Superintendent Cho is accused of being involved in the improper special recruitment of five dismissed teachers in 2018 (charges of abuse of authority and violation of the State Public Officials Act). There are also suspicions that the public officials in charge of recruitment were excluded from their duties during this process.

According to the HCIA's request for prosecution, the core of the case lies in Superintendent Cho directing the special recruitment of five teachers affiliated with the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union (JeonGyoJo), who had been convicted by the Supreme Court and were naturally retired. The Board of Audit and Inspection, which conducted an audit on the allegations, concluded that Superintendent Cho excluded the deputy superintendent, who refused to follow his instructions regarding the special recruitment, from duties and assigned the special recruitment tasks to his secretary chief, Mr. A. Superintendent Cho allegedly had Mr. A unfairly select the screening committee members and exposed the five special recruitment candidates to the committee members to ensure they received high scores.

The HCIA's final decision to prosecute was based on laws related to the appointment of educational public officials. The law states that "no one shall intentionally interfere with or unduly influence the examination or appointment of national public officials." Based on this and the demands from teacher organizations and opinions from Seoul city council members, the HCIA judged that Superintendent Cho abused his authority and exerted undue influence during the special recruitment process.

The HCIA did not accept all of Superintendent Cho's claims. Superintendent Cho argued that ▲ the special recruitment was reviewed based on opinions from teacher organizations and others, and it was not conducted with predetermined five candidates but based on fair evaluations by external screening committee members ▲ and that he made decisions alone to avoid burdening the officials in charge, who had previously been investigated in past special recruitment cases.

Superintendent Cho also submitted a statement of non-establishment of charges, denying that he instructed the appointment of special recruitment candidates or forced the deputy superintendent to hold a personnel committee related to the special recruitment. He detailed that he never influenced the appointment of screening committee members or pressured them to give high scores to specific individuals, nor did he exclude employees such as department heads or directors who opposed the special recruitment from their duties, thus denying the establishment of guilt.

Legal circles believe that the HCIA's decision to prosecute was not difficult. This is because there was sufficient basic material such as audit data from the Board of Audit and Inspection, which initially reported the case to the prosecution, and because investigative efforts were concentrated for over four months. The Prosecutorial Deliberation Committee, composed of legal experts, also legitimized the decision by voting in favor of prosecution.

However, there was some controversy. Superintendent Cho's side claimed invalidity and requested a re-deliberation because the HCIA did not allow defense attorneys to participate in the Prosecutorial Deliberation Committee, but the HCIA did not accept this.

Accordingly, Superintendent Cho's side plans to submit additional statements to the prosecution, which has the final authority to indict, and take further measures. Right after the HCIA's announcement, Superintendent Cho's side stated, "The prosecution will thoroughly review the investigation records and related evidence to correct the HCIA's erroneous judgment," and "Since the right to participate and the right to testify were blocked in the HCIA's Prosecutorial Deliberation Committee, we plan to request the convening of the Prosecutor's Investigation Deliberation Committee."

They also refuted the HCIA's investigation results point by point. Regarding the obstruction charge that Superintendent Cho conspired with the secretariat to interfere with the exercise of rights of public officials in charge of the special recruitment, they emphasized, "The HCIA failed to identify who the victim was, what rights of the public officials were obstructed, and did not present any evidence to support this."

Going forward, the prosecution will receive the investigation materials from the HCIA and make the final decision on whether to indict Superintendent Cho. According to the HCIA Act, the HCIA can only investigate cases involving Superintendent Cho but does not have the authority to prosecute. The HCIA's authority to both investigate and prosecute is limited to cases involving high-ranking officials such as judges, prosecutors, and police officers of rank superintendent or higher.

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