Police Do Not Prosecute Kim Geon-hee's False Career Claims... Remaining Investigations Also Concluded (Comprehensive)

Forgery of Private Documents, Obstruction of Business Charges
7-Year Statute of Limitations Passed, No Punishment Possible
Reinvestigation Possible Depending on Prosecutor's Decision
Bribery Allegations Against Reporter Also Not Prosecuted
7-Hour Recording Related Matters Concluded

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporters Seongpil Cho, Sehee Jang, Gyumin Oh] It was confirmed on the 25th that the police investigating allegations of false career claims by Kim Geon-hee, wife of President Yoon Seok-yeol, have decided not to prosecute the case. Although there is a possibility of reinvestigation due to objections from the accusers, legal circles predict that it will be difficult for a different outcome to emerge.

According to a comprehensive report from our coverage, the Anti-Corruption and Public Crime Investigation Unit of the Seoul Metropolitan Police Agency decided yesterday to dismiss the case against Mrs. Kim, who was accused of forgery of private documents and obstruction of business, citing "lack of prosecutorial jurisdiction." They concluded that the statute of limitations (7 years) for the charges of forgery of private documents, use of forged private documents, and obstruction of business under the Criminal Act has expired. Regardless of the presence of criminal charges, since punishment is not possible, they judged that there is no practical benefit in continuing the investigation.

The police plan to hand over the non-prosecution decision and the investigation materials to the prosecution as early as next week. The prosecution will review whether the police’s non-prosecution decision was illegal or unjust based on these materials. If the prosecution finds the non-prosecution decision illegal or unjust, it can request the police to reinvestigate. Even if the accusers file objections to the police investigation results, the prosecution can still request a reinvestigation from the police. In such cases, the authority to conclude the investigation lies with the prosecution.

Legal experts believe that even if the prosecution requests a reinvestigation, the police investigation results are unlikely to change. The statute of limitations for the main charges? forgery of private documents, use of forged private documents, and obstruction of business?has clearly expired. Mrs. Kim is accused of listing false or exaggerated career records and submitting forged career certificates while working as a part-time lecturer at Hallym Sacred Heart University in 2001, Seoil University in 2004, Suwon Women’s University in 2007, and Kookmin University in 2014. Even considering only the last submission to Kookmin University in 2014, the 7-year statute of limitations has passed, making punishment impossible.

However, the fraud charges cited in the complaint filed by the accusers? the National Movement Headquarters for Reform of Private Schools and Eradication of Corruption and the Institute for Livelihood Economy Research?are somewhat different. The statute of limitations for fraud under the Criminal Act is 10 years, which has not yet expired based on the submission date of the Kookmin University documents. The accusers argue that Mrs. Kim’s actions meet the elements of fraud, including deception and delivery of property. If the prosecution accepts this claim in the future, a reinvestigation request will be inevitable.

With the police’s non-prosecution decision, Mrs. Kim will be somewhat freed from criminal charges for now, but she is unlikely to escape moral criticism. The police’s conclusion of "lack of prosecutorial jurisdiction" on the main charges such as forgery of private documents does not mean "innocence." Mrs. Kim herself bowed her head at a public apology press conference in December last year, admitting, "I exaggerated and incorrectly stated my career to look good." A lawyer in Seocho-dong said, "Lack of prosecutorial jurisdiction due to expiration of the statute of limitations means the prosecution cannot file a lawsuit," adding, "From the perspective of investigative agencies, it also means deferring judgment on guilt."

Besides the false career allegations, various other cases involving Mrs. Kim seem to be wrapping up one after another. Earlier, the police decided not to prosecute the allegation that Mrs. Kim attempted to bribe reporter Lee Myung-su of the internet media outlet Seoul’s Voice. The case in which she was accused as an accomplice in forging her mother’s bank account balance certificate was also dismissed by the police due to insufficient evidence.

The police also cleared her of charges related to the so-called "7-hour recording." This case involved a complaint filed in February this year by the Institute for Livelihood Economy Research and others, citing a phone call recording between Mrs. Kim and reporter Lee Myung-su of the YouTube channel "Seoul’s Voice," which was reported by MBC Straight, alleging violations of the Political Funds Act and other charges.

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