“Son Junsung's Arrest Warrant to Be Issued” vs “Not a Matter for Arrest Warrant”… Diverging Views on ‘Gobal Saju’ Investigation

"Considering the Importance of the Matter and Political Situation, Warrant Request is Inevitable"
"Warrant Request Difficult Due to Unclear Evidence Relations"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, legal affairs specialist] Conflicting views are emerging in the legal community regarding the ‘report solicitation’ allegations currently under simultaneous investigation by the High-ranking Officials’ Crime Investigation Division (HOCID) and the prosecution.

If former Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol instructed former Deputy Director of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Investigation Information Policy Division Son Jun-sung to draft and deliver complaints against ruling party politicians, or if Son instructed another prosecutor to draft the complaints, there is a possibility that the crime of abuse of authority could be established. However, there is considerable skepticism about whether this can be proven with evidence.

In particular, considering the handling of Son Jun-sung’s custody, who has been identified as the drafter or deliverer of the complaints, as well as the significance of the related cases and the political situation, there are conflicting forecasts: some expect that an arrest warrant will be requested, while others believe that it will be difficult to request a warrant based solely on the revealed circumstances, as proving the charges may not be easy.

On the 17th, a lawyer who is a former chief prosecutor said, “The request for an arrest warrant for Son Jun-sung, who can be considered the key figure in this investigation, should be seen as a predetermined step,” adding, “Since the investigation needs to reach former Prosecutor General Yoon, it will be difficult to push forward without handling Son Jun-sung’s custody.” He further stated, “Whether the court later dismisses the warrant or acquits him is a matter to be considered afterward.”

Another lawyer said, “Due to Son Jun-sung’s ambiguous attitude, it seems highly likely that HOCID or the prosecution will request an arrest warrant.”

Son Jun-sung, after the allegations surfaced, issued two statements denying that he drafted the complaints or delivered the complaints or attached materials to Representative Kim Woong of the People Power Party.

However, the evidence submitted by whistleblower Jo Sung-eun, who claimed to have received the materials via Telegram from Representative Kim, includes files labeled ‘Sent by Son Jun-sung’ as the original provider, and even Minister of Justice Park Beom-gye has officially acknowledged that the Son Jun-sung mentioned here is the former Deputy Director Son.

If Son’s claims are true, these attached materials would be completely fabricated, but neither Son nor Representative Kim has made any special remarks regarding the possibility of evidence fabrication.

After receiving the complaints, HOCID, which has registered not only Son Jun-sung but also former Prosecutor General Yoon as suspects and immediately launched a forced investigation, appears to have secured physical evidence supporting charges such as abuse of authority.

On the other hand, there is a strong negative and skeptical atmosphere within the prosecution regarding this investigation.

A current prosecutor said, “To issue a warrant, the abuse of authority charge must be proven with evidence, which will not be easy,” adding, “A warrant is issued only if the charges are substantiated; if the warrant is requested but dismissed by the court, the entire investigation could collapse.”

Another prosecutor said, “Son Jun-sung should be seen as the counterpart in the abuse of authority in this case. He is closer to a key witness, so it will be difficult to issue a warrant against him,” adding, “While concerns about evidence tampering must be considered, the unclear evidence relationship means this is not a matter warranting a warrant.”

Legally, even if it is proven that Son Jun-sung himself drafted the complaints and delivered them to Representative Kim, he cannot be held responsible for abuse of authority. If it is proven that former Prosecutor General Yoon instructed Son, then the abuse of authority charge applies to Yoon, and Son is merely the counterpart. Of course, if Son instructed another prosecutor to draft complaints without obligation, abuse of authority could be established.

Concerns have also been raised about HOCID’s investigative capabilities. One prosecutor said, “Given that procedural issues caused noise even during the execution of search warrants, I am skeptical whether the inexperienced HOCID can substantiate charges enough to request an arrest warrant.”

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