'Baekhyun-dong Investigation Suppression Allegation' Legal Broker Sentenced to 4 Years in First Trial

by Kwak Minjae

Published 12 Apr.2024 16:21(KST)

Lee, a former chairman of KH Real Estate Development, who is accused of receiving a large sum of money under the pretext of quashing an investigation into Jeong Ba-ul, chairman of Asia Developer, who was under investigation for preferential treatment in the development of Baekhyeon-dong, was sentenced to prison in the first trial.

'Baekhyun-dong Investigation Suppression Allegation' Legal Broker Sentenced to 4 Years in First Trial

The Seoul Central District Court Criminal Division 21 (Presiding Judge Heo Kyung-moo) sentenced broker Lee, who was tried on charges of bribery under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes, to four years in prison and ordered the confiscation of approximately 1.33 billion won.

The court stated, "Considering that the defendant makes the same claims in court that were found to be baseless by the investigative authorities, there is doubt as to whether he is truly remorseful," and added, "Even taking into account favorable factors such as his confession, strict punishment is inevitable."

Earlier, Lee admitted to the charges during the trial but claimed that part of the disputed amount was money he lent and later recovered or payment for services provided as part of a sales project. However, the court did not accept Lee's claims.

Lee is accused of approaching Chairman Jeong, who was under investigation for the 'Baekhyeon-dong development preferential treatment suspicion,' from May 2022 to June last year and receiving approximately 1.33 billion won on multiple occasions.

During the investigation, the prosecution found that Lee introduced lawyer Im Jeong-hyeok, a former high-ranking prosecutor, and lawyer Kwak Jeong-gi, a former senior police officer, to Chairman Jeong to help quash the investigation. The prosecution indicted the two lawyers in January on charges of violating the Attorney-at-Law Act. The two lawyers deny the charges, claiming, "The fees were legitimately received, and there was no improper solicitation."