Kwonikwi: "Allegations Regarding Auditor General and Supreme Court Chief Justice Residences Are Not Violations of Law"

A judgment has been made that neither the official residence renovation project of Choi Jae-hae, the Chairman of the Board of Audit and Inspection, who was suspected of 'luxurious renovation,' nor the residence of the son of Kim Myung-soo, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, who was suspected of 'real estate speculation at the official residence,' violated any laws.

Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission. / Photo by Hyunmin Kim kimhyun81@

On the 13th, Jung Seung-yoon, Vice Chairman and Secretary General of the Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission (ACRC), announced the investigation results of these reported cases at a briefing at the Government Seoul Office. Earlier, the Democratic Party of Korea had reported to the ACRC in March that Chairman Choi had allegedly engaged in corrupt acts such as excessive budget use and splitting contracts for the renovation of the official residence since his inauguration.

The ACRC judged that the allegation that the Board of Audit and Inspection used the budget for purchasing items that should have been acquired as 'asset acquisition costs' under 'general acceptance costs' in the renovation of the Chairman's official residence was "difficult to see as causing financial damage to the Board." The Board had already issued a caution to the relevant department and is currently managing the purchased items in the inventory ledger, so there is no problem.

Regarding the suspicion that the Board excessively spent the budget on installing a shower booth in the restroom, the ACRC stated, "The budget was executed to address facility aging, repairs due to malfunction, prevention of safety accidents, and improvement of working conditions for management staff," and concluded that "it is difficult to view this as wasteful." Although the Democratic Party claimed that separating the orders for the pergola (shade shelter) and the lower deck construction was a 'split contract for a private contract,' the ACRC judged that it was conducted in compliance with the 'Government Bidding and Contract Execution Standards.'

The ACRC also explained that it is difficult to conclude that the Board's use of the audit budget for utility bills such as water and electricity at the Chairman's official residence constitutes corrupt behavior. Unlike general official residences used solely for personal living, the Chairman's official residence is frequently used for official duties such as meetings, work reports, and staff encouragement. However, the ACRC forwarded the reported content to the Board of Audit and Inspection for review on whether it is necessary to establish internal regulations including property and inventory management of the official residence.

The ACRC concluded that allowing the son and his spouse of Chief Justice Kim Myung-soo, who is a sitting judge, to reside free of charge in the Supreme Court Chief Justice's official residence is also not problematic. The son and his spouse lived in the Chief Justice's official residence from January 2018 to April 2019. There were suspicions that they moved in after winning the subscription for an apartment in Sinbanpo, Seoul, in September 2017, to prepare for the high-priced purchase payment.

The controversy regarding Chief Justice Kim's official residence was previously investigated by the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office but was dismissed without indictment in December last year. In April this year, another reporter filed a separate report to the ACRC, and an investigation was conducted. The ACRC explained, "The prosecution has already investigated the matter and dismissed it, and it is not unusual by social standards for married children to live with their families."

Regarding the allegation that Chief Justice Kim installed a playground for his grandson at the official residence using the Supreme Court budget, the ACRC judged that "the playground was confirmed to have been installed at personal expense" and that it was not a violation of the law. Concerning the Chief Justice's daughter-in-law having a dinner with her company's legal team members at the official residence, the ACRC judged that "it is an act permitted under social norms" and "there is no motive for preferential treatment, so it is difficult to see it as a violation of the Code of Conduct for Public Officials."

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