The Corruption Investigation Office and the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department Deliberate Over Methods of Obtaining Materials Related to Lee Seong-yoon's Indictment Leak

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyung-min] The High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Unit (HOCI) is reportedly deliberating on the timing to secure investigative materials from the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department regarding the 'allegation of Lee Seong-yoon, Seoul High Prosecutor General, leaking the indictment.'

HOCI has faced criticism for allegedly conducting targeted investigations against former Suwon District Prosecutors' Office investigation team prosecutors in connection with this case. To address this, they need to demonstrate that they have obtained and reviewed the inspection materials. However, it is analyzed that they are hesitant due to recent controversies over illegality during forced investigations such as raids.

According to the legal community on the 19th, HOCI has decided to secure the materials from the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department through forced investigation and is weighing the timing to request a search warrant.

HOCI is particularly in a position where it must obtain and review the report prepared by the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department after investigating the allegations.

The indictment leak allegation arose when the indictment content was first reported by the media during the prosecution's investigation into former Deputy Minister of Justice Kim Hak-ui, who was unlawfully subjected to a travel ban, and when Lee was indicted in May on charges of exerting external pressure.

Following this, the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department immediately launched a fact-finding investigation under the Ministry of Justice's directive. HOCI registered the case as 'Public Case No. 4' at the end of May and began its investigation. HOCI sent several official letters to the Inspection Department requesting materials, but each time, the Inspection Department refused to provide them, citing that an internal fact-finding investigation was ongoing.

Subsequently, the prosecution conducted investigations targeting the former Suwon District Prosecutors' Office investigation team prosecutors who investigated and indicted Lee. This led to criticism within and outside the prosecution that the former Suwon investigation team was being effectively targeted.

The Suwon District Prosecutors' Office sent an inquiry to the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Department requesting confirmation that the investigation team was not involved. In response, the Inspection Department replied that among about 20 individuals highly likely to be involved in the leak, the Suwon investigation team was not included. They also added that "special circumstances such as a search warrant are required to provide inspection materials."

For HOCI to secure the materials, it appears necessary to apply for and obtain a search warrant from the court. However, this method is burdensome as it was recently used when HOCI received data just a week after conducting a forensic analysis of the official mobile phone of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office spokesperson, who was suspected of being involved in the case. At that time, the Supreme Prosecutors' Office and HOCI were embroiled in controversy over 'subcontracted inspection.'

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