Prosecutors Reinforce Investigation on Former Lawmaker Kwak Sang-do After Warrant Rejection... Executive of Competing Consortium Construction Company Summoned for Questioning

Former National Assembly Member Gwak Sang-do. [Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] The prosecution, investigating allegations of lobbying and preferential treatment in the Daejang-dong development, has launched supplementary investigations to prove the charges against former National Assembly member Kwak Sang-do, whose arrest warrant was previously dismissed.

On the 27th, the dedicated investigation team at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office (led by Deputy Chief Prosecutor Kim Tae-hoon) summoned Mr. B, an executive at Construction Company A, which participated in the Industrial Bank consortium competing against the Hwacheon Daeyu-Hana Bank consortium during the 2015 public announcement for the Daejang-dong development private project. Mr. B was known to be responsible for land development districts and public offering projects at Construction Company A at that time.

During the investigation, the prosecution reportedly uncovered circumstances where Construction Company A proposed to Kim Jung-tae, Chairman of Hana Financial Group, to join the Industrial Bank consortium. The prosecution suspects that Kim Man-bae, the major shareholder of Hwacheon Daeyu, requested former Assemblyman Kwak to prevent the collapse of the Hana Bank consortium.

Mr. B’s summons and interrogation were conducted as part of the supplementary investigation to prove former Assemblyman Kwak’s charges of accepting bribes through mediation.

Previously, the prosecution alleged that former Assemblyman Kwak assisted Hwacheon Daeyu and, in return, received 2.5 billion KRW (after tax) several years later through his son under the pretext of severance pay. Based on this, the prosecution requested an arrest warrant last month on charges of bribery under the Specific Economic Crimes Act, but the court dismissed the request.

Notably, the judge presiding over the warrant hearing stated the dismissal was due to "the possibility of dispute over the establishment of the crime, and the need to guarantee the suspect’s right to defense," which sparked public criticism regarding the prosecution’s investigative capability and determination concerning the Daejang-dong lobbying allegations.

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