‘How to View the Investigation Deliberation Committee's Decision’ Emergency Debate
"No Precedent for Criminal Punishment Regarding Capital Market Act Merger Ratios"
Amid the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Investigation Deliberation Committee's recommendation to 'halt the investigation and not prosecute' Vice Chairman Lee Jae-yong of Samsung Electronics, on the 1st, organizations including the Barun Society Citizens' Meeting and the Free Economy Forum held an emergency debate titled 'How Should We View the Decision of the Investigation Deliberation Committee?' at the Korea Press Center in Jung-gu, Seoul.
[Asia Economy Reporter Dongwoo Lee] As the Supreme Prosecutors' Office's Investigation Deliberation Committee recommended 'suspension of investigation and non-prosecution' regarding Samsung Electronics Vice Chairman Lee Jae-yong, experts from various fields including civic groups gathered to discuss whether the prosecution will accept the recommendation.
On the 1st, Choi Joon-sun, Honorary Professor at Sungkyunkwan University School of Law, said at an emergency debate titled ‘How to View the Decision of the Investigation Deliberation Committee’ held at the Korea Press Center in Jung-gu, Seoul, hosted by the Barun Society Citizens' Meeting and the Free Economy Forum, “If the prosecution rejects the investigation deliberation committee system it created itself, it will be obstinacy rather than pride.”
Professor Choi explained, “The allegations of illegal succession of management rights against Vice Chairman Lee can be divided into ‘bribery charges’ and ‘accounting fraud charges,’” adding, “They delayed the suspect investigation on accounting fraud for a long time and plan to indict around the time the bribery case concludes.”
He continued, “The merger ratio between Samsung C&T and Cheil Industries was calculated according to the mandatory provisions of the Capital Market Act Enforcement Decree,” and questioned, “If they are punished for merging based on the ratio calculated under the mandatory law, who would dare to propose a merger in the future?”
Professor Choi emphasized, “The merger ratio is a civil issue that can be remedied through lawsuits such as annulment of the merger,” and “There has been no precedent of indictment or criminal punishment for merger ratio issues under the Capital Market Act.” He added, “The Investigation Deliberation Committee was a microcosm of public opinion,” and “I expect a wise judgment from the prosecution.”
Kim Jung-ho, Adjunct Professor at Sogang University Graduate School of Economics and a panelist at the debate, said, “Accounting experts say there is no problem with Samsung’s method, but the People's Solidarity for Participatory Democracy and the prosecution are accusing Samsung Biologics of accounting fraud,” adding, “Compared to the Investigation Deliberation Committee, the People's Solidarity and the prosecution are more political. We need to abandon anger over the Lee Jae-yong case and look at it sincerely.”
Kim Tae-woo, Co-Representative of the Barun Society Citizens' Meeting and moderator of the debate, explained, “Samsung holds a significant share in the Korean economy and contributes considerably to the gross domestic product, yet it is criticized by the public as a typical chaebol company,” adding, “While the privileged consciousness of the second generation of chaebols must be eradicated, it does not mean that large corporations should be suppressed.”
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
