[2023 National Audit] Ruling Party: "Lee Jae-myung Perjury Coaching Trial Should Have Been Assigned to a Single Judge"

Kim Jeong-jung, Chief Judge of Seoul Central District Court, "Deemed a Case with Significant Social Impact"

At the National Assembly Legislation and Judiciary Committee's audit on the 24th regarding the Seoul High Court and Central District Court, the ruling party criticized the assignment of the perjury coaching case involving Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, to a collegiate panel, claiming it was intended to delay the trial.

Kim Jeong-jun, Chief Judge of the Seoul Central District Court, is seen conversing with court officials on the morning of the 24th at the Seoul High Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul, during the National Assembly Legislation and Judiciary Committee's audit. 2023.10.24 Photo by National Assembly Press Photographers Group [Image source=Yonhap News]

During the audit, Jeon Ju-hye, a member of the People Power Party, stated, "The perjury coaching case against Lee was originally supposed to be tried by a single criminal judge, but it was strangely assigned to a criminal collegiate panel through a reallocation agreement," adding, "This was a trick to extend Lee's political life. The court may face criticism for protecting Lee Jae-myung."

In response, Kim Jeong-jung, Chief Judge of the Seoul Central District Court, explained, "The perjury coaching case was received as a single judge case under the jurisdiction of a single judge, but the case assignment authority, following regulations on the division of judges' duties and case assignments, judged that due to the significant social impact of the case or its nature, it was appropriate to be tried by a collegiate panel, so it was reassigned as a collegiate case."

The Seoul Central District Court assigned the perjury coaching case against Lee, indicted by the prosecution on the 16th, to the 33rd Criminal Division (Presiding Judge Kim Dong-hyun). This panel is also handling Lee's Daejang-dong, Wirye, and Seongnam FC suspicion cases, as well as the Baekhyeon-dong development preferential treatment suspicion case.

According to the regulations on the division of judges' duties and case assignments, the case assignment authority (Senior Criminal Division Chief) may refer single judge cases with significant social impact to the Pretrial Decision Division to decide whether to have the case tried by a collegiate panel.

Rep. Jeon questioned why the case was not assigned to the 34th Division, which is not handling the multiple cases involving Lee, but to the 33rd Division. Chief Judge Kim responded, "Election law cases have separate provisions regarding loss of assembly membership and eligibility to run for office depending on the sentence, so they do not need to be sentenced together as separate cases," adding, "I guess it was considered more appropriate to assign the case to the 33rd Division handling other cases rather than the election law panel (34th Division)."

In response, Kim Do-eup, a member of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee, said, "It is common for election law cases and general cases to be merged and tried together," and requested, "Please submit in writing this afternoon the reasons why the case assignment authority made this decision."

Park Hyung-soo, also from the People Power Party, argued that the Daejang-dong, Baekhyeon-dong cases and the perjury coaching case have no commonalities and should not be merged. In fact, Lee's side has requested the court to merge the Baekhyeon-dong and perjury coaching suspicion cases with the Daejang-dong trial.

Rep. Kim stated, "The Daejang-dong and Baekhyeon-dong cases have similar methods of crime and commonalities, but the perjury coaching case is completely different," adding, "If this case is merged as well, including Daejang, Seongnam FC, Baekhyeon-dong, and perjury coaching, it will become a complicated case, and it is uncertain when the trial will conclude."

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