Prosecution’s Investigation Review Committee loses fairness and credibility relating to case of First Lady

Civil society is criticizing the prosecution\'s recommendation that the prosecution not indict First Lady Kim Keon-hee who was accused of receiving a luxury bag. Reporter Han Soo-bin

The Prosecution’s Investigation Review Committee, which reviewed the case of First Lady Kim Keon-hee who was accused of allegedly receiving a luxury bag, recommended not indicting Kim on all charges. The prosecution is expected to dismiss the charges against Kim sometime this week, before Prosecutor General Lee Won-seok leaves office. The review committee was held with only the prosecution's investigation team and Kim's defense present, and its discussions were closed to the public. Critics say Lee failed to ensure the “impartiality of the investigation” he promised when he convened the committee ex officio.

The gist of what the Prosecution’s Investigation Review Committee decided in a closed-door meeting on September 6 was to recommend dismissal of all six charges, including violation of the Anti-Graft Act, tipping, violation of the Lawyers Act, bribery, abuse of authority, and destruction of evidence.

The problem is that both the process and the content of how the committee reached this conclusion have been criticized. In a shorter-than-expected five-hour session, the committee first heard the prosecution's case in the form of a presentation from the investigative team, and then asked and answered questions. The same process was followed for Kim's legal representatives.

After more than two hours of discussion, the committee accepted the prosecution's and Kim's arguments that the gift Kim received from Pastor Choi Jae-young, totaling more than 5 million won, were not related to President Yoon Suk-yeol’s duties and were not given in exchange for favors. It appears to have accepted the investigative team's grounds for non-prosecution, such as that Kim refused Choi's request or it was not delivered to the first lady. The committee also ruled that the abuse of authority that Kim attempted to intervene in the personnel of the Financial Services Commission and that she attempted to destroy evidence by designating the luxury bag as a presidential record were untrue.

According to a report by Kyunghyang Shinmun on September 8, some committee members expressed their opinion that the prosecution's investigation has not been sufficiently conducted and that "more investigation should be conducted," but only a few said like that. It is said that no member insisted that Kim be prosecuted. Some reportedly pointed out that "the act of receiving a luxury bag itself was wrong," regardless of whether Kim was prosecuted or not.

The committee did not grant Choi's request for attendance. It discussed the case without listening to the story of the person who gave her the bag and solicited her. However, Choi's opinion was distributed to the committee members, which made the committee being criticized as a “half-sized.” The names of the members, the content of their discussion, and the results of their votes on each charge are not officially disclosed. The 10-month prosecution investigation has been criticized for not going far enough to resolve public suspicions. Some say it was impossible for the members, who only received the results of the prosecution's exoneration on the day of the meeting, to reach a different conclusion than the prosecution.

Many say that Prosecutor General Lee's intention to complement the fairness of the investigation with the review committee also failed. Earlier, Lee had cited “enhancing fairness and tying up loose ends so that no further controversies remain” as the rationale for convening the committee.

Lawyer Lee Chang-min said on a phone interview, "If the committee judges based on the results of the leniency investigation, it is bound to produce biased results. The appearance of the committee is not impartial at all, which only adds to the distrust.” A senior prosecutor said, “It was a process where the conclusion was virtually set in stone.”

On September 12, an appeals court will be sentenced in the Deutsch Motors stock price manipulation case, in which the prosecution has delayed the disposition of Kim for more than four years. The legal circle pays attention to the court's judgment on Mr. Son, who is accused of playing the same role as Kim. Son was acquitted of conspiracy to manipulate stock prices in the first trial, but the prosecution added a charge of aiding and abetting stock price manipulation to Son in the appeal trial. If Son is found guilty, it is expected to increase public opinion that Kim should also be prosecuted.

※This article has undergone review by a professional translator after being translated by an AI translation tool.