Prosecutor: "Did Yudonggyu reprimand staff over 'excess profit recovery' opinion?"... Witness: "Difficult to answer"

12th Trial of the 'Daejang-dong' Case

[Image source=Yonhap News]

Prosecutor: How did you know that Mr. Joo was reprimanded?

Witness: After (Mr. Joo) returned from reporting, his complexion was not good, and he said he was scolded a lot there. (Omitted) I understand that he took the report to the business team, but I do not know whether the business team discussed it with the Planning Headquarters Director. I do know that he said he was severely reprimanded after returning.

Prosecutor: Besides Jeong Min-yong, Yoo Dong-gyu, and Kim Min-geol, no one else could have reprimanded Mr. Joo, right? Among these three, who could have scolded him?

Witness: I don't think anyone from the working-level staff did.

Prosecutor: Do you mean Yoo Dong-gyu?

Witness: I find it difficult to answer that.

In the trial concerning preferential treatment and lobbying allegations in the Daejang-dong development project in Seongnam City, testimony has again emerged that a working-level official from Seongnam Urban Development Corporation (Seongnam UDC), who suggested a plan to recover excess profits from private developers, was severely reprimanded by a Seongnam UDC official.

On the 7th, the 22nd Criminal Division of the Seoul Central District Court (Presiding Judge Lee Jun-cheol) held the 12th hearing for five defendants, including former Seongnam UDC Planning Headquarters Director Yoo Dong-gyu, Hwacheon Daeyu Asset Management (Hwacheon Daeyu) major shareholder Kim Man-bae, lawyer Nam Wook, and accountant Jeong Young-hak.

On this day, Mr. Lee, the team leader of the Management Business Headquarters at Seongnam UDC, appeared in court for witness examination. He worked as a deputy head of the Development Support Part in the Development Project 1 Team of Seongnam UDC's Development Project Headquarters in 2015.

The prosecutor questioned Mr. Lee about the circumstances under which his then-colleague Mr. Joo was reprimanded by a Seongnam UDC official. It was reported that Mr. Joo pointed out the omission of a plan to recover excess profits from private developers in the public offering guidelines drafted by lawyer Jeong Min-yong one day before the project announcement.

Another Seongnam UDC employee, Mr. Park, also testified in a previous hearing that he heard Mr. Joo was reprimanded by former Director Yoo.

The Daejang-dong trial had experienced delays due to the replacement of the presiding judges following regular personnel changes within the court, but as related procedures have been completed, the trial is regaining momentum. On the 11th, witness examination of accountant Kim Min-geol, who was involved in drafting the Daejang-dong development project public offering guidelines, is scheduled.

Meanwhile, lawyer Jeong was absent from the trial due to COVID-19 infection and other reasons, and the court decided to conduct separate proceedings for his defense.

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