Supreme Court Rules "Submission of Indictment Without Prosecutor's Signature Is Invalid"

Supreme Court, Seocho-dong, Seoul.

[Asia Economy Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist Reporter] The Supreme Court has ruled that if a prosecutor submits an indictment to the court with only their name written and without a signature or seal, the procedure violates the law and is invalid.

The Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Presiding Justice Kim Jae-hyung) announced on the 4th that it overturned the first trial, which sentenced construction businessman Mr. A to one year in prison after finding him guilty of four fraud cases, and upheld the appellate court's ruling that sentenced him to 11 months in prison.

The court stated, "Although the appellate court's reasoning that the prosecutor's defect can only be supplemented in the first trial is inappropriate in principle, the appellate court's conclusion that the procedure for filing the indictment in this case violates legal provisions and is invalid is correct."

Mr. A was accused of four fraud charges, including pocketing about 42 million won in construction fees in 2017 and borrowing 50 million won from another company’s representative under the pretense of transferring the rights to a country house project, then embezzling it.

The first trial, which consolidated the four cases, found Mr. A guilty and sentenced him to one year in prison.

However, the second trial overturned the first trial's ruling, dismissed the indictment on one of the four fraud charges, and reduced the sentence to 11 months in prison. This was because the indictment submitted by the prosecutor lacked the prosecutor's signature or seal, which is mandatory when submitting an indictment.

The court explained, "Article 57, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act stipulates that 'Documents prepared by public officials must include the date of preparation and the affiliated public office, and must be signed or sealed unless otherwise provided by law.' Since 'documents prepared by public officials' include indictments prepared by prosecutors, an indictment submitted to the competent court without the prosecutor's signature or seal violates Article 57, Paragraph 1 of the Criminal Procedure Act."

It added, "Therefore, filing an indictment without the legally required format is, unless there are special circumstances, a procedure that violates legal provisions and is invalid."

The court further stated, "The appellate court overlooked this procedural defect in filing the indictment, delivered a copy of the indictment to the defendant, conducted a trial on this part of the indictment, and then rendered a guilty verdict. Therefore, the appellate court's ruling contains an error in the legal principle regarding the effect of filing the indictment, which influenced the judgment."

The Supreme Court also agreed with the appellate court's judgment.

However, the Supreme Court noted that the appellate court's sua sponte ruling that the prosecutor's defect can only be supplemented in the first trial was inappropriate.

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