Illegal Donations for 'Joo Cheol-hyun Election Purpose'... Fines for Key Officials of the Democratic Party Jeonnam Provincial Party

[Asia Economy Honam Reporting Headquarters Reporter Park Jin-hyung] Ahead of the 21st general election, two key officials of the Democratic Party of Korea Jeonnam Provincial Party, who committed illegal donation acts to elect candidate Joo Cheol-hyun, were sentenced to fines.

According to the legal community on the 3rd, the 1st Criminal Division of the Gwangju High Court (Presiding Judge Lee Seung-chul) dismissed the appeals of A and B, who were indicted for violating the Public Official Election Act, and upheld the first trial that imposed fines of 2 million won each.

A was active as the Special Committee Chair for Revitalizing the Low-Income Economy of the Democratic Party’s Yeosu City Gap District Committee and is accused of making illegal donations to help candidate Joo Cheol-hyun win the general election.

Under current law, donation acts cannot be made in the name of a candidate or affiliated party for election candidates.

In July 2019, A purchased and provided samgyetang (ginseng chicken soup), alcoholic beverages, and fruits at a senior citizens’ association support event to raise awareness of candidate Joo Cheol-hyun.

B, who was the vice-chairman of the Yeosu City Gap District Committee, was responsible for securing 70 to 80 seniors attending the event, as well as singers and volunteer members who would conduct the event.

The event was attended by seniors residing in the Yeosu City Gap district, who had voting rights, including candidate Joo.

Candidate Joo (Yeosu City Gap) won the general election with 48,410 votes (64.4%), defeating incumbent lawmaker Lee Yong-joo (Independent), who received 23,128 votes (30.8%), and earned the gold badge.

A and B stated in their appeal, "This was done as a service to the elderly and not as a donation act for candidate Joo Cheol-hyun regarding the election," and argued that "the original trial misjudged the facts and wrongly found us guilty."

In response, the second trial cited Supreme Court rulings stating that "when denying the intent of donation acts, it can only be proven through indirect facts closely related to intent," and judged that "the original trial’s recognition of guilt is sufficiently reasonable."

It added, "Even considering the circumstances claimed by the defendants as grounds for appeal, the original trial’s evidence assessment and fact-finding do not appear irrational or contrary to common experience," and "no new evidence or circumstances that could affect such judgment emerged during the court’s trial process."

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