Attorney Who Leaked Recording File While Defending JMS, Court Dismisses Indictment

Court Dismisses Prosecution's Appeal, Upholds Original Indictment Dismissal

The appellate court has also dismissed the indictment in the case where the defense attorney for Jung Myung-seok of the Christian Gospel Mission (JMS), who was sentenced to a heavy prison term for sexually assaulting a female follower, was accused of leaking a recorded audio file.

According to Yonhap News on May 12, the 2-2 Criminal Division of the Daejeon District Court (Presiding Judge Kang Juri) dismissed the prosecutor's appeal in the case against Attorney A for charges including leaking work secrets.

The court stated, "The facts and actions involved in Jung Myung-seok's sexual crime trial and this case are completely unrelated," adding, "Considering that the defendant is not a co-offender with Jung Myung-seok and that swift investigation is necessary to protect the victim's rights, the prosecution did not have the authority to initiate an investigation into this case. Therefore, the original ruling is valid."

Dismissal of an indictment is a decision by the court to terminate the trial without judging the substance of the case, in special situations such as violations of legal procedures in filing the indictment.

Attorney A, who defended Jung Myung-seok, was brought to trial in May 2024 on charges of handing over a USB containing the audio recording from the crime scene and personal information submitted by the victim during the appellate trial of Jung's sexual assault case to a JMS follower. The prosecution also argued that on that day and the following day, followers were allowed to listen to the audio recording using a laptop.

The victim, identified as Maple, reported the unknown leaker to the prosecution through a legal representative. The prosecution launched its investigation by focusing on the attorney listed in the application for access and copying of Jung's trial records.

The first trial determined that the prosecution had exceeded the investigative scope permitted to it, and also found it difficult to see a direct connection between this case and Jung's sexual crime case.

The prosecution appealed, arguing that it had not exceeded the investigative powers granted by law, but this was not accepted. The appellate court concluded that the prosecution did not have the authority to initiate the investigation in the first place and dismissed the appeal.