"'Stock Rich' Lee Hee-jin, Whistleblower, Loses Compensation Lawsuit in Second Trial"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Lee Myunghwan] The whistleblower who reported Lee Heejin (36), the so-called 'stock millionaire' whose prison sentence was confirmed for illegal stock trading and investment solicitation charges, to investigative agencies and financial authorities filed an administrative lawsuit demanding a public interest whistleblower reward but lost again in the second trial.

According to the court on the 10th, the Seoul High Court Administrative Division 4-2 (Presiding Judges Han Kyuhyun, Kim Jaeho, Kwon Kihoon) recently ruled against plaintiff A, who filed a lawsuit against the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission (ACRC) demanding the cancellation of the decision to dismiss the reward payment application, just as in the first trial.

A reported Lee to the Supreme Prosecutors' Office and the Financial Supervisory Service in 2016. The reason was that Lee induced paid membership subscriptions to a securities broadcast and solicited investment funds without registering as a financial investment business. Lee was prosecuted two months after A's report was received and was sentenced to 3 years and 6 months in prison for violating the Capital Markets Act, the Act on the Regulation of Similar Financial Transactions, and fraud.

A claimed that he discovered illegal activities while listening to Lee's securities broadcast and reported them, but as a result, he was stripped of his membership and demanded to be recognized as a public interest whistleblower and receive a reward, but the ACRC dismissed the claim. A then filed an administrative lawsuit, but the court made the same judgment as the ACRC.

The first trial court stated, "The plaintiff only entered into a paid membership contract and received stock investment information, so it cannot be considered that there was a 'guidance or management/supervision relationship' with Lee, nor can Lee be regarded as a public institution, company, corporation, or organization that can impose disadvantages on the plaintiff."

The purpose of the Public Interest Whistleblower Protection Act is that a public interest whistleblower must be under the influence of the reported party, be subject to guidance, management, and supervision, and be someone who can suffer disadvantages due to the report.

A appealed the ruling, but the result did not change. The appellate court dismissed his appeal, stating, "It is difficult to view the plaintiff's loss of paid membership status in the securities broadcast as a disadvantageous measure due to the public interest report, and there is no evidence to recognize that the plaintiff may suffer other disadvantageous measures."

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