Gangseon Lee of Seocheon County Council Criticizes Kim Kiwoong's Work Expense Explanation as Evasive... Concentrated Spending Before Election

Governor Kim Spent 54% of Work-Related Expenses in 61 Cases Over Four Months
Lee: "The Real Issue Is Timing, Target, and Concentration—Provide Documentation"

Councilman Kangsun Lee of Seocheon County Council, Chungnam

Kangsun Lee, a councilor of Seocheon County Council in Chungnam (Democratic Party), directly refuted Seocheon County Mayor Kim Kiwoong of the People Power Party's explanation regarding the use of business promotion expenses, calling it “an argument that misses the core issue.”

On April 19, Councilor Lee issued a commentary on Mayor Kim’s rebuttal posted on Facebook, stating, “Though his explanation is lengthy, he failed to address the essence of what residents are curious about,” and added, “Even if the expenditures are wrapped in justifications such as administrative stability, responsible administration, and staff encouragement, questions regarding the concentrated spending just before the local elections remain unresolved.”

Previously, Mayor Kim had claimed that the meal in question was “the minimum courtesy,” and that encouraging public officials prior to his suspension was “a decisive move to prevent a vacuum in county administration.”

In response, Councilor Lee pointed out, “The real issue is not merely the staff encouragement meal itself, but rather ▲ why it took place right before the election, ▲ why it continued up to the brink of his suspension, ▲ why it was directed at each department and township, and ▲ why the spending was concentrated within such a short period.”

He further criticized, “Repeating only general principles without concrete explanations is not clarification, but rather an evasion of responsibility.”

In fact, more than 54.2% (24.32 million won) of this year’s institution operation business promotion expenses—out of a total of 44.88 million won—were executed from January to April 10, across 61 separate instances, according to records.

Councilor Lee emphasized, “These figures can only appear to residents as concentrated spending ahead of the election, and such circumstances may raise suspicions of administrative neutrality being compromised and concerns of undue influence in the election,” and added, “Public officials should reflect on their actions not just by the law, but by the standards of trust and common sense held by the residents.”

He also addressed Mayor Kim’s statement that he “chose administrative stability over the election,” by saying, “This only heightens the need for greater restraint and distance,” and pointed out, “During an election period, even stricter discipline should be applied to the use of public funds and authority.”

In particular, regarding suspicions raised over “duplicate payments for the same time, place, and attendees” in some expenditure records, Councilor Lee pressed, “What the residents want is not an emotional appeal but verifiable data,” and asserted, “The issue can be resolved by transparently disclosing the list of attendees, purpose of use, business relevance, and credit card approval and cancellation records.”

Councilor Lee concluded, “This is not simply a controversy over a staff dinner, but a question of how public authority and budgets were used in the run-up to the election,” adding, “Rather than lengthy explanations, disclosure of records and a sincere account should come first.”

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