#1. In Tongyeong, South Gyeongsang Province, a stepfather committed the heinous crime of sexually assaulting his teenage stepdaughters. The police immediately launched an investigation, applied for an arrest warrant, and transferred the case to the prosecution. However, during the prosecution's supplementary investigation, the case took a dramatic turn. The victims' statements were inconsistent, and a third party's DNA was found on the underwear. The prosecution conducted a full reinvestigation, canceled the arrest of the initial suspect (the stepfather), identified the real perpetrator-someone close to the victims-and secured a conviction of five years in prison.

#2. In Incheon, a man who stabbed his live-in girlfriend with a weapon was arrested by the police and transferred to the prosecution. The police had built the case on the assumption that the man had stabbed his partner, causing injury. However, during the prosecution's supplementary investigation, suspicious circumstances emerged, suggesting the victim had inflicted the wounds on herself. The prosecution started over, reviewing emergency call records (112 and 119), police body camera footage, and cellphone forensics. They confirmed through forensic analysis that only the victim's DNA was found on the weapon, leading to the cancellation of the man's arrest and a decision of no charges.

#3. In Jangheung, South Jeolla Province, a woman with an intellectual disability was sexually assaulted by village residents. However, the police decided not to refer most of the residents involved in the case for prosecution. The prosecution 'requested' a reinvestigation from the police, but the police did not comply. Eventually, the prosecution received the case through an objection filed by the victim and began a new review. After a detailed analysis of the victim's testimony, the prosecution was able to bring the perpetrators to trial.

These cases illustrate the necessity of supplementary investigations by the prosecution. If the 'Four Prosecution Reform Laws' promoted by the government and the ruling party become reality, a major disruption of the criminal justice system, which has been maintained for 70 years, is expected. The plan is to abolish the Prosecution Service and establish the Serious Crime Investigation Agency and the Prosecution Office, resulting in a complete separation of investigation and prosecution. The problem is that even if investigation and prosecution are separated, there must be at least minimal control mechanisms in place, but discussions or measures on this issue are absent from the current reform efforts.

If investigations, which inherently carry the risk of human rights violations, are handled by only one investigative agency, there will be no way to control faulty investigations, and it may take a long time to uncover hidden crimes and restore actual victims. There is also the risk of failing to provide relief to unjust victims. For these reasons, there is a growing call for 'democratic oversight' to keep investigative agencies in check.

If the Four Prosecution Reform Laws Pass
Complete Separation of Investigation and Prosecution

Even If Doubts Arise About Police Investigations
Prosecution Cannot Supplement Investigations
Cases Must Be Sent to Police
Must Go Through Resubmission Process
Minimum Control Measures Disappear

Case Processing Time Will Lengthen
Unjust Victims May Occur Photo by Getty Images Bank

Since the adjustment of investigative authority between police and prosecution, the police have acquired the right to make the first decision to close a case, resulting in a sharp increase in non-referral cases, while the prosecution's involvement has actually decreased. According to the Supreme Prosecutors' Office on September 2, the number of non-referral cases rose from 379,821 in 2021 to 545,509 last year, a 43.6% increase over three years. However, of the cases the police sent to the prosecution with a non-referral opinion last year, the prosecution requested reinvestigation in only 14,243 cases, or just 2.61%. This figure had remained in the 3% range since 2021, but fell into the 2% range for the first time last year.

This is analyzed as a result of the abolition of the prosecution's authority to direct investigations, which has eliminated the prosecutor's responsibility for non-referral cases. Even if a prosecutor requests a reinvestigation, there is no legal basis for the prosecution to demand disciplinary action if the police do not comply. Rather than a system in which cases can be reviewed two or three times by multiple parties, it has effectively created a situation where the police act as the sole judge. With both the authority and responsibility to review cases taken away, some within the prosecution have sarcastically referred to themselves as 'well-being prosecutors.' Attorney Yang Hongseok of Lee Gong Law Firm explained, "The records the police send with a non-referral opinion are filled only with information supporting innocence, and prosecutors are forced to make judgments based solely on these records. Even if prosecutors thoroughly review the case, their efforts are not visible, and since they are no longer responsible, they simply leave things as they are."

If the government's and ruling party's prosecution reform bill passes as it is, the problem will become even more serious. The legal community is concerned that abolishing the prosecution's supplementary investigation power will further exacerbate the 'case ping-pong' between police and prosecution and cause greater investigative delays. Previously, the prosecution could conduct supplementary investigations directly and decide whether to indict, but if the current reform plan becomes reality, the prosecution will have to send cases back to the police for resubmission whenever there are doubts about the police investigation and they cannot make a decision on indictment, inevitably lengthening the case processing time.

원본보기 아이콘

There are also concerns that if the prosecution's supplementary investigation power is completely stripped away, there will be no effective control mechanism to check and correct inadequate police investigations. Even if the prosecution has doubts about a police investigation, they will not be able to hear statements from those involved or collect evidence, making it impossible to correct errors in police investigations if they occur.

It appears that under the newly reorganized criminal justice system, it will not be easy to correct flawed investigations. The Prosecution Office, which will be responsible for indictments until doubts about transferred cases are resolved, will not be able to bring cases to trial, and cases sent back to the police will be left to the discretion of investigators, with a high likelihood of indefinite delays or neglect.

A prosecution official stated, "Last year, there were over 10,000 cases where the prosecution directly conducted supplementary investigations on police-transferred cases and issued 'no charges,' and about 1,000 cases where prosecutors directly conducted supplementary investigations or judicial oversight and brought charges on police non-referral cases. If suspects are unjustly detained at the police stage and prosecutors cannot directly investigate or collect relevant materials to correct errors in police investigations, it could actually undermine the protection of human rights."