Seongnam FC Whistleblowers: "Is Spending on Advertising by 6 Companies a Coincidence?"

Obtained 24-Page Appeal Document
Simultaneous Support During Controversial Period
Criticism Over Incomplete Deliberation and Misinterpretation of Facts

Bundang Police Station / Photo by Bundang Police Station Homepage Capture

[Asia Economy Reporter Jo Seong-pil] "Are you saying that six companies, including Doosan Construction, coincidentally spent advertising expenses on Seongnam FC during a period when each had pending issues?"

The complainants who first raised the so-called 'Seongnam FC sponsorship fund suspicion,' alleging that Lee Jae-myung, the Democratic Party presidential candidate, received sponsorship funds from companies and provided special favors while serving as mayor of Seongnam, have reportedly submitted an objection letter to the police's decision not to prosecute, containing such claims. This content in the objection letter is also a matter that the police will need to clarify through supplementary investigations in the future.

In the objection letter obtained by Asia Economy on the 11th, the complainants sharply criticized the police investigation point by point, citing reasons such as ▲insufficient examination ▲misunderstanding of facts ▲misinterpretation of legal principles. The objection letter, consisting of 24 pages on A4 paper, was submitted to the Bundang Police Station in Seongnam, which handled the case, last September. The complainants stated in the letter, "According to the investigation results, a total of six companies simultaneously sponsored Seongnam FC, controlled by Mayor Lee Jae-myung of Seongnam, during the period when they had pending issues, and there was no sponsorship before or after that period," and questioned, "Could such an event have happened coincidentally without a common understanding or agreement?" They added, "Nevertheless, the police failed to provide any data or convincing reasons explaining why the timing of payments coincided with the existence of pending issues," and asked, "Are we to believe in six unbelievable large-scale 'coincidences'?"

They also argued in the letter that the police have a legal misunderstanding regarding the charge of third-party bribery. In this context, they referred to the logic of the Supreme Court's August 2019 plenary session ruling on former President Park Geun-hye's third-party bribery charge in the 'state manipulation' case, which recognized 'implicit illicit solicitation' as grounds for conviction. At that time, the plenary session ruled, "The target or content of illicit solicitation does not need to be specific, and it is sufficient if a quid pro quo relationship can be recognized between the public official's duties and the benefits provided to the third party," and "The awareness of this can be implicit and does not need to be definitive." Based on this precedent, the complainants stated, "Mayor Lee Jae-myung of Seongnam could not have been unaware of the six companies' pending projects and issues as a party involved through complaint reception, reporting, and approval," and "There was clearly mutual awareness."

The Seongnam FC sponsorship fund suspicion centers on the allegation that from 2015 to 2017, when Lee served as mayor of Seongnam and was the owner of Seongnam FC, six companies (Doosan Construction, Naver, Nonghyup, Bundang CHA Hospital, Hyundai Department Store, Alphadom City) provided about 16 billion KRW in sponsorship and advertising fees to Seongnam FC and received special favors in return. According to the investigation results, the timing of the sponsorship payments coincided with the companies obtaining approvals for changes in use and building permits. However, the police previously decided not to prosecute in September last year, stating, "We did not find evidence to conclude that there was a common understanding or agreement between the candidate and the companies to sponsor advertising fees to Seongnam FC in exchange for handling pending issues."

The complainants, dissatisfied with the police investigation results, submitted the objection letter, and the case was transferred to the prosecution. At the Seongnam branch office, Park Eun-jung, the branch chief known for her pro-government stance, repeatedly rejected the investigation team's opinion that "reinvestigation is necessary," raising suspicions of investigation suppression. Deputy Chief Prosecutor Park Ha-young of the Seongnam branch, who was in charge of the investigation, tendered his resignation and eventually retired on the 10th. Amid this controversy, the Suwon District Prosecutors' Office, the higher authority, ordered supplementary investigations at the Seongnam branch on the 7th, and the Seongnam branch passed the baton back to the police. The Bundang Police Station is currently reviewing the supplementary investigation requests from the prosecution alongside the existing police investigation records.

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