Prosecutors: "Yoo Dong-gyu Submits Confession Statement Admitting to 'Ordering Cell Phone Destruction'"

Yoo Dong-gyu, former head of Seongnam Urban Development Corporation, is attending the trial related to the Daejang-dong development project lobbying and preferential treatment allegations at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul on the 28th. Photo by Kang Jin-hyung aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Seongpil Cho] The prosecution revealed that former Seongnam Urban Development Corporation Planning Director Yoo Dong-gyu submitted a statement admitting to instructing his common-law spouse to dispose of his mobile phone during the 'Daejang-dong investigation.'

On the 17th, the prosecution stated at the trial of the evidence destruction case involving Mr. Yoo's common-law spouse, Ms. A, presided over by Judge Joo Jin-am of the 15th Criminal Division at the Seoul Central District Court, "Mr. Yoo recently submitted a statement acknowledging his involvement and expressing remorse." The prosecution submitted this statement as additional evidence to the court. When the court asked, "Is this to say that Mr. Yoo confesses to destroying evidence?" the prosecution replied, "Yes." They also emphasized, "In the statement, Mr. Yoo clearly stated that he instructed Ms. A to dispose of a specific mobile phone."

Mr. Yoo was additionally indicted in April this year on charges of instructing Ms. A to dispose of his previously used mobile phone just before the prosecution's search of his residence on September 29 last year (obstruction of evidence). Ms. A was summarily indicted for breaking Mr. Yoo's mobile phone and throwing it away in a garbage bag but was formally brought to trial in June this year. Until July, Mr. Yoo's side had maintained that "there was no instruction to destroy evidence, and even if such an act occurred, it cannot be legally punished."

Ms. A's lawyer acknowledged, "Ms. A admits to disposing of the mobile phone itself," but argued, "However, she was unaware that the phone was evidence to be used in an important criminal case, so there was no intent to destroy evidence." The lawyer added, "Frankly, Mr. Yoo's statement contradicts his previous testimonies, causing confusion and embarrassment," and requested the court, "Please allow additional time for review so we can finalize our position."

The court also expressed suspicion over Mr. Yoo's sudden change of stance, stating, "There are aspects that are hard to understand. It feels like Mr. Yoo is trying to protect the defendant." The court pointed out, "(According to investigation records) after Mr. Yoo was detained, he negotiated with the prosecution, saying, 'Give me the mobile phone, and I will be investigated without detention.'" The court continued, "Later, when the defendant said she broke and disposed of the phone, Mr. Yoo reportedly got angry." Furthermore, the court noted, "If he intended to destroy evidence, he could have done it himself, so it is strange that he asked the defendant to do it. Also, if the phone contained important evidence, it could have served as his defense, so instructing to dispose of it is itself suspicious."

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