Last Jeong Gyeong-shim Trial Before Bench Change... "Prosecution's Charges and Evidence All Problematic"

[Asia Economy Reporter Seongpil Cho] On the afternoon of the 12th, the 4th trial session of the case involving Professor Jeong Gyeong-sim of Dongyang University was held in Courtroom 424 of the Seoul Central District Court. This was the final trial presided over by Chief Judge Song In-kwon of the Criminal Division 25 of the court. Chief Judge Song will be transferred to the Seoul Southern District Court on the 24th due to regular court personnel changes.

Defense: "The charge of evidence destruction does not hold"

On this day, Professor Jeong's defense team presented rebuttal opinions against the prosecution's charges. They argued that the charge of instructing evidence forgery related to the private equity fund suspicion is not legally valid. The charge centers on the claim that Professor Jeong created false explanatory materials about the private equity fund suspicion ahead of the personnel hearing of her husband, former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk. The defense attorney stated, "Not only are the facts incorrect, but fundamentally, it does not meet the essential requirements of the crime of evidence destruction itself," adding, "To indict for evidence destruction, the main crime must be specified in the indictment, but that part is missing."

Under criminal law, the crime of evidence destruction, including forgery and concealment of evidence, applies to evidence related to "another person's criminal or disciplinary case." The defense's argument means that since there is no 'criminal case' in question from the start, the charge of evidence destruction does not apply. The defense said, "Just because the actual shareholder of Korink PE is Cho Beom-dong, the fifth cousin of former Minister Cho, or because Korink PE is a family fund, it does not constitute a criminal offense," and "Even if Professor Jeong knew the fund's investment destination in advance, it does not constitute a criminal fact."

Prosecution's mentions of Cho Kuk have decreased significantly, but...

The prosecution conducted evidence examination on the suspect interrogation record of Cho Beom-dong, the fifth cousin of former Minister Cho. Based on the suspect interrogation record, Cho was said to have recommended investment to Professor Jeong, who then explained the circumstances of purchasing stocks using undisclosed information from Cho for the dream of a building in Gangnam. During this process, former Minister Cho's name appeared several times.

Previously, in the 3rd trial session, the prosecution also presented some of former Minister Cho's Twitter posts as evidence. The tweets contained criticism by former Minister Cho of former Gyeongnam Governor Hong Jun-pyo for violating the Public Officials Ethics Act during the 2015 Seong Wan-jong list controversy. The defense team protested, saying, "This content is unrelated to the case."

During this trial, as former Minister Cho's name appeared repeatedly, the defense raised objections. "It was the same in the previous trial; whether former Minister Cho knew or did not know this content is not an issue in this case," they pointed out. Chief Judge Song's remark in response caused laughter in the courtroom: "It seems to have decreased a lot compared to last time."

From the prosecution's perspective, this was an embarrassing comment. The prosecution said, "We are not talking about irrelevant matters; former Minister Cho was mentioned as we discussed the overall course of the crime," adding, "If the judge says so, we will be careful in our explanations."

Professor Jeong's diary revealed... Defense: "Violation of the principle of proportionality"

During the evidence examination of the suspect interrogation record, the prosecution revealed notes from Professor Jeong's mobile phone. The memo, in diary format, included content such as "My husband has been Chief of Civil Affairs for over 10 months. He has been running at full speed without brakes." It continued with wishes like "It has been a year since investing in Korink. I will recover the first investment and watch the second, but I need to restructure the portfolio. I hope my son succeeds in preparing for law school. I hope my daughter completes her medical studies in good health." The prosecution argued that such content shows Professor Jeong took the lead in planning the fund investment.

The defense team countered that the prosecution presented illegal evidence. The defense said, "Submitting even a diary as evidence violates the constitutional principle of proportionality." They added, "The Criminal Procedure Act prohibits exploratory and comprehensive evidence collection," and criticized, "The prosecution submitted all text messages between Professor Jeong and her daughter from after medical school admission to the present, which has nothing to do with the admission fraud." They further requested a release decision again, stating, "Much of the evidence lacks probative value and falls under bail matters."

First trial session with new bench scheduled for the 27th in the main courtroom

Chief Judge Song said regarding the defense's bail request, "It is difficult to decide from a changing position." On the principle of prohibition of excessive evidence, he said, "If the prosecution responds, it will help the new bench decide on the admissibility of evidence."

Chief Judge Song had set this date as the last trial session during the 2nd trial last month. This was a decision leaving open the possibility of his departure due to court personnel changes. At that time, he said, "I might stay or be replaced, so I will not schedule any more trial dates," adding, "Until then, I will postpone witness examination and only proceed with documentary evidence investigation." It was a consideration for the succeeding judge.

Chief Judge Song designated the first trial session to be held after the bench change for 2 p.m. on the 27th. He said, "I did not anticipate which judge will come, so I reserved the main courtroom for the next trial." The succeeding judge will be decided at the Seoul Central District Court Judges' Work Allocation Committee meeting next week.