The Corruption Investigation Office Only Indicts Son Jun-sung in the ‘Report Solicitation’ Allegation... Ultimately Fails to Apply ‘Abuse of Authority’ Charges

Kim Woong Election Law Violation Case Referred to Prosecutors
Yoon Seok-yeol, Kim Kun-hee, Han Dong-hoon Not Indicted
Assemblyman Jeong Jeom-sik and 3 Prosecutors Also Not Indicted
Kim Jin-wook, Chief Prosecutor, Said "Abuse of Power is Core," but Could Not Prove... Deemed a 'Failed Investigation'

Yeowoon-guk, Chief of the High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Office, is announcing the investigation results of the 'Solicitation of Prosecution' case on the morning of the 4th at the first-floor training room of the Corruption Investigation Office./Photo by Choi Seok-jin

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] The High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Agency (HCIA), which has been investigating the 'accusation manipulation' allegation case, concluded its investigation on the 4th by referring Prosecutor Son Joon-sung (Human Rights Protection Officer at Daegu High Prosecutors' Office) to trial on charges including violation of the Public Official Election Act.

Having investigated the case for eight months since September last year, the HCIA, following accusations from pro-government civic groups, filed charges against President-elect Yoon Seok-yeol, his wife Kim Geon-hee, and Justice Minister nominee Han Dong-hoon, conducting extensive raids. However, it ultimately failed to apply the 'abuse of authority' charge, which HCIA Chief Kim Jin-wook had insisted was the 'core' of the case, even against Prosecutor Son.

On the morning of the same day, the HCIA indicted Prosecutor Son without detention on four charges: violation of the Public Official Election Act, official secret leakage, violation of the Personal Information Protection Act, and violation of the Electronic Criminal Procedure Act. The abuse of authority charge against Prosecutor Son was dismissed.

Additionally, the HCIA dismissed the abuse of authority and official secret leakage charges against Assemblyman Kim, and transferred the remaining charges, including conspiracy with Prosecutor Son on the Public Official Election Act violation, which were not subject to HCIA prosecution or investigation, to the prosecution.

Furthermore, the HCIA cleared President-elect Yoon, nominee Han, People Power Party Assemblyman Jeong Jeom-sik, and three prosecutors who were jointly investigated with Prosecutor Son of any charges. Regarding Kim, the abuse of authority charge was dismissed, and other alleged crimes were transferred to the prosecution.

The HCIA determined that Prosecutor Son sent complaints and documents such as rulings concerning pro-government figures, including Choi Kang-wook and Hwang Hee-seok, who ran in the April 15, 2020 general election, to Assemblyman Kim on April 3 and 8, 2020, twice, intending to negatively influence the election. This act was judged to constitute a violation of the Public Official Election Act. Assemblyman Kim, who forwarded the complaints and documents received from Prosecutor Son to the United Future Party, was charged with conspiracy related to Prosecutor Son's Public Official Election Act violation.

Moreover, the HCIA viewed Prosecutor Son's transmission of complaints containing investigation information related to criminal charges to Assemblyman Kim as official secret leakage. It also charged the act of sending the real-name ruling documents of Ji Mo, the whistleblower in the 'media-prosecutor collusion' suspicion, which were viewed and collected by officials from the Investigation Information Policy Office under Prosecutor Son's instruction, to Assemblyman Kim as violations of the Personal Information Protection Act and the Electronic Criminal Procedure Act.

Regarding the failure to apply abuse of authority charges to the two individuals, the HCIA explained, "There was insufficient evidence that officials from the Investigation Information Policy Office prepared the first and second complaints under Prosecutor Son's instruction, and although it was acknowledged that the defendant instructed officials to view and collect rulings, this did not constitute compelling them to perform acts without legal obligation under the abuse of authority statute. The deliberations of the Prosecution Review Committee were also considered." It added, "Since the abuse of authority charge against Prosecutor Son was dismissed, all related charges against other suspects were also dismissed."

During the investigation, two arrest warrants for Prosecutor Son were rejected, and a court ruling declared the HCIA's search of Assemblyman Kim illegal, fueling public criticism of the HCIA's 'excessive investigation.' Furthermore, revelations that the HCIA indiscriminately conducted communication surveillance on journalists and ordinary citizens during the investigation led to calls for the 'abolition of the HCIA.'

Although the HCIA referred Prosecutor Son to trial, it failed to clarify the abuse of authority charge, which Chief Kim had identified as the 'core' of the case, making it difficult to avoid the assessment that this was a 'failed investigation.'

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