Prosecutors Decide Not to Indict All Election Law Violation Charges Against Oh Se-hoon and Park Young-sun

Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon. [Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] The prosecution has decided not to indict all parties involved, including Seoul Mayor Oh Se-hoon and former Minister of SMEs and Startups Park Young-sun, who were accused of spreading false information during the Seoul mayoral by-election.

On the 6th, the Public Investigation Division 2 of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office (Chief Prosecutor Kim Kyung-geun) announced that after investigating the Seoul mayoral by-election-related cases, they decided not to indict all 26 election law violation accusations against Mayor Oh and former Minister Park.

The prosecution dismissed all charges against 19 individuals, including Mayor Oh, politicians from both ruling and opposition parties, and media personnel, who were accused of violating election laws related to land in Naegok-dong, the Pi City project, and attendance at conservative group rallies.

Additionally, all six individuals, including former Minister Park and politicians from the People Power Party, involved in the Tokyo apartment dispute were cleared of charges on the 1st and the 6th.

The prosecution also decided not to indict former Minister Park in a citizen group’s accusation related to the disaster relief fund pledge, as no wrongdoing was found.

During the Seoul mayoral by-election campaign held in April, the Democratic Party alleged that Mayor Oh, while in office in 2009, was involved in designating his in-laws’ land in Naegok-dong as a public housing site and received a 3.6 billion KRW 'self-compensation'.

Mayor Oh, who was a candidate at the time, denied the allegations, stating, "I was unaware of the existence and location of this land, and the designation was a matter decided solely by the Housing Bureau Director." The Democratic Party filed a complaint against him for spreading false information.

Mayor Oh was also accused of spreading false information for statements made during the election period denying any connection between the 'Pi City project' and his tenure as mayor. He was further accused for stating that he attended a far-right rally 'once' during the election period.

Regarding the Naegok-dong land allegations, the prosecution investigated over 20 related individuals, including farmers, survey team leaders, the mother and son of an ecological soup restaurant, and Mayor Oh’s family. They analyzed credit card usage records from Mayor Oh’s side and data from related institutions such as the Seoul Metropolitan Government to reach their conclusion.

Even if Mayor Oh’s statement at the candidate debate that he 'did not visit the survey site' was false, if it was made in the context of denying the main allegation that he was involved in his in-laws’ land compensation, it is difficult to consider it a violation of the Public Official Election Act (spreading false information) according to Supreme Court precedents, the prosecution concluded. They also noted that the Prosecutors’ Citizen Committee’s review reached the same conclusion.

The Supreme Court’s position is that “unless there are special circumstances such as an intention to actively disclose false information regardless of the topic or context of the debate, it is not punishable as spreading false information. Punishing statements made during candidate debates for spreading false information should be approached cautiously, minimizing intervention by prosecutors and courts to broadly protect political freedom of expression.”

The prosecution judged that statements related to Pi City and attendance at conservative group rallies, which were forwarded by the police, are also difficult to regard as spreading false information based on the Supreme Court precedents.

Meanwhile, regarding the case in which former Minister Park was accused of spreading false information about disposing of a Tokyo apartment registered under her husband’s name during the by-election, the prosecution reviewed the apartment’s registration documents, transaction records, the declared value based on the average monthly exchange rate on the property declaration date, the spouse’s employment history, and address change records. They concluded that the disposal, actual residence purpose, and declared value of the Tokyo apartment cannot be considered false information.

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