First Appeal Trial of 'Yoon Seok-yeol Prosecutor General's Disciplinary Appeal Lawsuit', Key Issues Summarized

Yoon's Side: "Only Procedural Defects, Not Substantive Ones, Summarized... Yoon Delegates to Agent"
Ministry of Justice: "Won the First Trial, No Further Claims... Will Organize Proof Plan"

[Asia Economy Reporter Heo Kyung-jun] The first appellate trial of the administrative lawsuit filed by President-elect Yoon Seok-yeol, who contested the two-month suspension disciplinary action he received from the Ministry of Justice while serving as Prosecutor General, was held on the 19th.

The Seoul High Court Administrative Division 1-1 (Presiding Judges Shim Jun-bo, Kim Jong-ho, Lee Seung-han) conducted the first preparatory hearing for the appeal lawsuit requesting the cancellation of the Prosecutor General’s disciplinary action. After the hearing, Yoon’s side stated, "Among the procedural and substantive defects of the disciplinary action, today we organized the issues related to the procedural aspects," adding, "The issues discussed today include the convening procedure of the disciplinary committee and the composition of the committee." The preparatory hearing was held privately for about 20 minutes with only the legal representatives of both parties present.

Yoon’s side explained, "The injunction court judged that there was illegality due to a lack of quorum, but in the main case, the interpretation was completely opposite, stating that only the decision quorum needs to be met."

When asked whether the lawsuit would proceed to the end without withdrawal, Yoon’s representative said, "Due to the special circumstance that the plaintiff has become president, the legal team believes that they cannot decide to drop the case," adding, "The president-elect said, ‘Lawyers, please agree among yourselves.’"

On the other hand, the Ministry of Justice, the opposing party in the lawsuit, said, "We won in the first trial, so we have nothing more to argue," and added, "The court asked us to organize the issues and clarify the evidence plan, so we will do so."

The court will hold a second private preparatory hearing on June 7 to reconfirm both parties’ opinions on procedural defects. It will also organize the issues necessary to determine whether there were substantive defects in the disciplinary reasons.

The first trial dismissed Yoon’s claim, stating that "the Ministry of Justice’s disciplinary procedure was lawful." The first trial court stated, "It cannot be seen as an abuse of discretion entrusted to the disciplinary authority," and that the disciplinary reasons recognized, such as the creation and distribution of surveillance suspicion documents and obstruction of inspection and investigation, sufficiently justify the disciplinary action.

Furthermore, the court ruled, "These disciplinary reasons constitute serious misconduct that undermines the legality and fairness of prosecutorial affairs," and "According to the relevant disciplinary standards, disciplinary actions of dismissal or higher are also possible." This implied that the two-month suspension disciplinary action was actually lighter than the lower limit of the disciplinary range set by the standards.

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