Beopseoryeon Requests Investigation into Kim Jin-wook, Head of the Corruption Investigation Office for High-Ranking Officials, and Han Dong-soo, Head of Inspection, over Alleged 'Subcontractor Oversight'

From the left, Jinwook Kim, Chief of the Corruption Investigation Office for High-Ranking Officials, and Dongsu Han, Head of the Inspection Department at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office.

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] A request for investigation has been submitted to the prosecution regarding the allegations of ‘subcontracted inspection’ between the High-ranking Officials’ Crime Investigation Unit (PCC) and the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Inspection Department related to the case involving former Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol, including the ‘report solicitation’ incident, targeting PCC Chief Kim Jin-wook and Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Inspection Department Head Han Dong-soo.

The civic group, Action Alliance for Establishing the Rule of Law (Beopse-ryeon, Representative Lee Jong-bae), submitted the investigation request to the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office on the 2nd, accusing Chief Kim and Head Han of violating the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act, the Public Official Election Act, and abuse of authority.

Beopse-ryeon stated, “On October 29, the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Inspection Department forcibly secured the official mobile phones used by current Supreme Prosecutors’ Office spokesperson Seo In-seon and former spokespersons Kwon Soon-jung and Lee Chang-soo under the pretext of investigating the so-called ‘report solicitation’ allegations and ‘documents related to the mother-in-law.’ During the submission process, the Inspection Chief threatened spokesperson Seo by saying, ‘If you do not submit the phone, it will be considered non-cooperation with the inspection, which is also subject to inspection,’ effectively seizing the phones by force. It is said that a week after the illegal forensic analysis of the seized phones without the presence of the parties involved, on the 5th of last month, the PCC conducted a raid on the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office and took the forensic data,” they explained.

They continued, “Following the PCC’s raid on the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office and seizure of the spokesperson’s mobile phone data, on the 15th of last month, the PCC also raided the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office’s Investigation Information Division and seized solid-state drives (SSDs) used for work by former Investigation Information Policy Officer Son Jun-sung and prosecutors and investigators from that department, which were stored in a warehouse. It is said that the PCC was the first to identify the warehouse office where the SSDs were kept during the raid. Additionally, the arrest warrant request for Prosecutor Son reportedly included a statement that former spokesperson Kwon sent documents related to former Prosecutor General Yoon’s mother-in-law to a certain reporter via KakaoTalk,” they added.

Beopse-ryon argued, “Considering the fact that the PCC raided the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office and took related materials just a week after the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Inspection Department seized the spokesperson’s official mobile phones, that the warehouse office storing the SSDs used by former Policy Officer Son was identified first, that the arrest warrant request for Son included content seemingly from the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Inspection Department’s materials, and that both Chief Kim and Head Han are pro-government in orientation, it is highly likely that Chief Kim and Head Han conspired to conduct illegal inspections and raids with the intent to influence the election.”

They further pointed out, “If Chief Kim requested Head Han to conduct an illegal inspection, it would constitute a violation of Article 5 of the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act, which prohibits soliciting acts that violate laws in the investigation, trial, judgment, decision, mediation, arbitration, reconciliation, or equivalent duties. If Head Han ordered the Inspection Chief to forcibly seize the spokesperson’s mobile phone, it would be an abuse of authority by compelling an unnecessary act.”

Moreover, Beopse-ryon stated, “If Chief Kim and Head Han conspired to conduct illegal inspections and raids with the intent to influence the election, it could be considered a violation of the Public Official Election Act. Therefore, we request an investigation into Chief Kim and Head Han for violations of the Improper Solicitation and Graft Act, the Public Official Election Act, and abuse of authority.”

Beopse-ryon emphasized, “If the PCC and the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Inspection Department conspired to conduct illegal inspections and raids with the intent to influence the election, this constitutes judicial manipulation and a clear disruption of the national order. As this is a very serious case threatening democracy, we urge the prosecution to conduct a thorough investigation and severely punish Chief Kim and Head Han if charges are proven.”

Previously, the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Inspection Department sparked controversy by seizing official phones used by spokespersons during former Prosecutor General Yoon’s tenure under the guise of voluntary submission and conducting forensic analysis without allowing former spokesperson Kwon to observe.

The Inspection Department stated that although they asked the administrative staff of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office spokesperson’s office, who was storing the devices, whether they wished to observe the forensic analysis, the staff refused, claiming the phones were not theirs. They maintain that there was no procedural problem even if former spokesperson Kwon was not notified of the seizure or given an opportunity to observe.

However, many in the legal community argue that when the subject of a search and seizure is not the physical phone itself but the information contained within, such as text messages, the data subject’s right to observe should be guaranteed.

In this context, Beopse-ryon filed a complaint against Kim Deok-gon, Chief of the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office Inspection Division 3, last month for coercion and abuse of authority. The case is currently under investigation by the Anti-Corruption and Violent Crime Division 1 (Chief Prosecutor Jeong Yong-hwan) of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office.

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