Cho Kuk at a Crossroads over 'Leniency for Cho Min'... Expected to State His Position in Court Today

Former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk faces a crossroads ahead of the prosecution's judicial processing of his daughter, Cho Min. His options are twofold: to continue asserting innocence regarding the admission fraud charges, which he has maintained even after the first trial's guilty verdict, and actively contest the appeal trial; or to admit to some criminal facts and show remorse, thereby maximizing the chances of leniency for his daughter Cho Min and son Cho Won.

Since his wife, former Dongyang University professor Jung Kyung-shim, who is already considered an accomplice, had her guilty verdict related to Cho Min's admission fraud confirmed by the Supreme Court, it is difficult for the prosecution to dismiss charges against Cho Min regardless of whether Cho Kuk admits to his charges. However, as the prosecution has stated it will decide whether to indict Cho Min based on both her and Cho Kuk's attitudes in the appeal trial court, if Cho Kuk admits to some of the admission fraud charges and shows remorse, the prosecution may issue a non-prosecution disposition with suspension of indictment (acknowledging the crime but not prosecuting) for Cho Min or at least file a summary indictment, thereby avoiding a situation where the entire family faces trial.

Former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk and his daughter Cho Min attending Cho's book concert.

There is speculation that Cho Kuk may run in the general election scheduled for April next year. Regardless of his personal intentions, there are considerable voices among Democratic Party supporters calling for his political comeback. Personally, despite his wife Jung's confirmed guilty verdict and his own guilty verdict in the first trial with an ongoing appeal, if he runs and wins a seat in the National Assembly, he could at least restore his political pride.

Cho Kuk, who has yet to clarify his stance on running in the general election, posted on his Facebook page the previous day a screenshot of a news article headline and subtitle suggesting that he, former President Moon Jae-in, and former Democratic Party leader Lee Nak-yon would form an anti-Lee Jae-myung group. He wrote, “Many write novels based on baseless imagination and speculation, borrowing the form of news articles. I am taking care of my battered family and reflecting deeply on the past and present.” By dismissing the article analyzing his candidacy as a 'novel written with baseless imagination and speculation,' he implied he has no time to care about such things, but did not explicitly rule out the possibility of running in next year’s election, leaving room for interpretation.

Between the two options, it is true that strongly asserting innocence and pointing out the unfairness of the first trial’s guilty verdict in the appeal trial seems more advantageous for the election. If, as the prosecution has warned, Cho Kuk’s unrepentant attitude leads to his children also being prosecuted, it could be perceived by opposition party supporters as the entire family being persecuted by the Yoon Suk-yeol government’s prosecution, potentially maximizing vote consolidation.

On the other hand, since the Supreme Court has already confirmed seven instances of falsification of Cho Min’s credentials by Jung, acknowledging these irrefutable facts and avoiding a situation where the children are also prosecuted is a choice Cho Kuk could reasonably consider. However, even if he runs and wins a seat in the National Assembly, if a guilty verdict with imprisonment is confirmed, he would lose his eligibility to hold office, invalidating his election, making it difficult for him to admit guilt.

Currently, the prevailing analysis is that both Cho Kuk and Cho Min will claim that Jung, who has already received a confirmed guilty verdict, led all situations and that they were completely unaware of the document forgery and other facts beforehand. In Jung’s case, unless a retrial is granted due to evidence fabrication by the prosecution, the confirmed facts cannot be overturned.

On the 13th, the prosecution stated that “the attitudes of Cho Min and Cho Kuk are among the most important factors in deciding whether to indict Cho Min as an accomplice in the admission fraud.” The very next day, Cho Min was summoned and investigated as a suspect.

Before the prosecution’s investigation, Cho Min withdrew lawsuits she had filed against Korea University and Pusan National University Medical School, which had canceled her admission. The prosecution likely questioned whether Cho Min’s decision was based on admitting her charges and accepting the cancellation of admission by the schools.

Three days before submitting the appeal withdrawal for the lawsuit against Pusan National University Medical School’s admission cancellation, on the 7th, Cho Min posted on her social media, “I want to abandon everything and return to my original intention to start anew from scratch,” adding, “I will seriously consider my future, contributing to society with a sense of social responsibility as a citizen.” Although she mentioned 'social responsibility' as the reason for withdrawing the lawsuit, she did not directly state whether she admitted to the charges.

It is not yet confirmed what statements Cho Min made during the prosecution’s investigation. However, given that her father Cho Kuk is undergoing trial, it seems unlikely that she admitted prior knowledge of the forgery of documents submitted to the schools. The prosecution’s understanding of her as an accomplice means her testimony could be used as unfavorable evidence against Cho Kuk in his trial, and she could be called as a witness and questioned in court.

In February, Cho Min appeared on a YouTube channel hosted by broadcaster Kim Eo-jun and stated, “You cannot become a doctor with just a certificate of commendation.” She also testified in her trial that she did not consider the Dongyang University certificate important for medical school admission and that if she had thought it would be problematic, she would not have submitted it during the medical school application.

The Seoul High Court Criminal Division 13 (Presiding Judge Kim Woo-soo) will hold the first appeal trial session at 2 p.m. on the 17th for Cho Kuk and others, who are charged with bribery and abuse of power. According to the defendant’s attendance obligation, Cho Kuk must appear in court. Typically, at the first appeal trial session, the prosecution and defense lawyers present their reasons for appeal and positions on the charges, so it is expected that Cho Kuk’s stance on his children’s admission fraud will be revealed on this day.

Representative cases where parents and children were investigated as accomplices for admission fraud include the Ewha Womans University admission fraud involving Choi Seo-won (formerly Choi Soon-sil)’s daughter Jung Yoo-ra and the Sookmyung Girls’ High School exam paper leak case.

Choi was prosecuted and sentenced to prison, but Jung Yoo-ra received a non-prosecution disposition with suspension of indictment. In contrast, in the Sookmyung Girls’ High School case, twin daughters and their father, who was the school’s head of academic affairs, were all prosecuted as accomplices.

Once the prosecution completes judicial processing of Cho Min and Cho Won, the investigation into the Cho Kuk family will conclude after four years. The statute of limitations for the charges against Cho Min related to fraudulent admission to Pusan National University Medical School, including obstruction of official duties by deception and use of forged documents, expires on the 26th of next month.

Seung Jae-hyun, senior research fellow at the Korea Institute of Criminal Justice Policy, said, “The most important factor in sentencing judgment in this case is whether the crime facts are admitted.” He added, “The prosecution considers Jung Kyung-shim, Cho Min, and Cho Kuk all accomplices in the Pusan National University Medical School admission fraud case, but all three accused of being accomplices claim that since they actually performed volunteer work or activities, it was not forgery.”

Researcher Seung said, “Remorse presupposes acknowledgment of the act,” and “Therefore, the prosecution likely summoned Cho Min to ask about the meaning of her lawsuit withdrawal regarding the admission cancellation.”

He continued, “For the prosecution to grant non-prosecution (suspension of indictment) because Cho Min admitted forgery and is remorseful, the accomplice’s testimony must be consistent. If Cho Kuk contests in court that it was not forgery and disputes the charges, the prosecution cannot write in Cho Min’s non-prosecution document that ‘considering her admission of wrongdoing, sincere remorse, relatively clear social ties, and first offense, non-prosecution is decided.’”

He added, “Because the same facts cannot lead to different conclusions, the prosecution will likely refer to Cho Kuk’s trial.”

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