Jung Jin-sang's Defense Team: "Cannot Trust Yoo Dong-gyu's Testimony... He Reversed His Statement After Prosecutors' Investigation"

Prosecution: "Submit Interview Report in Court... Please Make Reasonable Claims"

The legal team of Jeong Jin-sang, former Chief of Political Coordination at the Democratic Party of Korea’s representative office, raised concerns about the credibility of the testimony given by Yoo Dong-gyu, former head of the Seongnam Urban Development Corporation and a key witness in the bribery case.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

On the 16th, Jeong’s defense attorneys held a press conference in front of the Seoul Central District Court’s West Building, claiming, "We absolutely cannot trust Yoo Dong-gyu’s testimony, which is almost the only evidence."

The defense team summarized the substance and falsity of Yoo’s testimony, pointing out that Yoo repeatedly changed his key statements during the prosecution’s investigation phase.

The defense argued that the prosecution induced Yoo to alter his testimony through ‘illegal interview investigations.’

They stated, "From October 14 to 16 last year, the prosecution conducted interview sessions lasting 6 to 9 hours a day without drafting suspect interrogation records," claiming this violated the Criminal Procedure Act.

They added, "According to the suspect interrogation record dated October 17 of the same month, details such as the method and location of delivering 40 million won between April and June 2014 changed during the prosecutor’s interview, and the fact that 30 million won was given in 2019 suddenly emerged," suggesting this was a circumstance suspected of the prosecutor leading the testimony.

Furthermore, they said, "Although the Daejang-dong case was already concluded through the prosecution’s investigation, after the regime changed, it was re-investigated with political intent, and Jeong and Representative Lee Jae-myung were forcibly indicted," expressing "strong regret over the political investigation and indictment."

In response, the prosecution rebutted that Jeong’s defense team was making baseless claims.

The prosecution stated, "The prosecutor’s interviews were lawfully conducted with the presence of investigators, informing the suspect of the right to legal counsel and the right to refuse to testify, and all contents were documented in reports, with investigation process confirmation forms signed by the parties attached," adding, "Despite the prosecution submitting all reports detailing such interviews in court, the defense is baselessly claiming the interviews were illegal."

They also explained, "Yoo’s testimony aligns with objective evidence and statements from other witnesses, all of which were presented and examined in court," and expressed confidence that "the court will wisely assess the credibility of Yoo’s testimony in the upcoming trial."

The prosecution also urged Jeong’s defense team to make reasonable arguments in court, stating, "We ask the defense attorneys to present reasonable arguments based on evidence and legal principles inside the courtroom, not outside."

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