Tomorrow, National Assembly Audit of Central, Southeast, North, and West District Prosecutors' Offices under Seoul High Prosecutors' Office to be Held
Questions Expected Over Kim Bong-hyun Chairman's 'Prison Statement' Revelation
Attention on Prosecutor Lee Sung-yoon's Response Regarding Omission of Optimus Allocation and Reporting
On January 13, Lee Seong-yoon, the newly appointed Chief Prosecutor of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, is greeting at the inauguration ceremony held at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office building in Seocho-gu, Seoul. Photo by Kim Hyun-min kimhyun81@
[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin] Just days before the National Assembly’s inspection of the prosecution, the emerging ‘prosecutor lobbying’ allegations have become a new flashpoint for the hearing.
Unlike last week’s Ministry of Justice hearing, where the ruling party defended against the opposition’s focused attacks over Justice Minister Choo Mi-ae’s son’s alleged ‘failure to return from leave,’ this prosecution hearing is expected to feature the ruling party’s offensive against the opposition and prosecutors newly identified as targets of lobbying by Lime Asset Management.
Tomorrow’s National Assembly Inspection of Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office and Seoul Central, Eastern, Southern District Prosecutors’ Offices... Optimus and Lime Lobbying Allegations at Issue
According to the National Assembly and legal circles on the 18th, the Legislation and Judiciary Committee will conduct a hearing on the 19th from 10 a.m. at the National Assembly, focusing on the prosecution offices under the Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office and Suwon High Prosecutors’ Office.
During the prosecution hearing, questions are expected to focus on the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office and the prosecutors’ offices in the southeast, northeast, northwest, and financial districts, where investigations into major cases are underway.
Under the Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office are the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office investigating the Optimus Asset Management case, which recently sparked lobbying allegations involving political and business circles; the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors’ Office investigating the Lime Asset Management case; and the Seoul Eastern District Prosecutors’ Office, which investigated the allegations of special military leave granted to Minister Choo’s son.
In the Optimus case, evidence of all-out lobbying targeting the Blue House, ruling party politicians, and financial authorities has already surfaced.
A document titled ‘Fund Defect Remedy Related,’ prepared by Kim Jae-hyun, CEO of Optimus (50, indicted and detained), in May states that ‘government and ruling party officials who helped resolve conflicts with former Optimus CEO Lee Hyuk-jin are participating as project beneficiaries.’
Additionally, during the investigation of the Optimus case, the names of two former and current Blue House administrative officers and one investigator from the Civil Affairs Office have been mentioned.
There have been criticisms that the investigation team, despite securing physical evidence suspected of lobbying during early raids and obtaining related testimonies from company officials, deliberately delayed the lobbying investigation and stalled the case for months.
Recent media reports revealed the substance of internal documents obtained by the prosecution and that some contents of these documents were actually executed, prompting the prosecution to double the size of the investigation team and form a dedicated lobbying investigation unit.
Lawmakers from the People Power Party are expected to intensively question the prosecution’s inadequate investigation into ruling party politicians identified as lobbying targets by Optimus and former Blue House administrative officers who held shares in Optimus.
Ruling Party Likely to Counterattack Over Lime Lobbying Allegations Targeting Opposition Politicians and Prosecutors
Meanwhile, Kim Bong-hyun, former chairman of Star Mobility (46, indicted and detained), recently identified as a key figure in the ‘Lime scandal,’ made a sensational disclosure of lobbying involving opposition politicians and current prosecutors in a statement sent to the media.
In the statement from prison, Kim claimed that he hosted a 10 million won worth of drinking party at a room salon in Cheongdam-dong for three current prosecutors introduced by lawyer A, a former prosecutor who was the lead investigator during the late President Roh Moo-hyun’s case. At the gathering, A reportedly said they were ‘prosecutors who might join the Lime investigation team if it is formed later,’ and indeed, shortly after, one of them became the head of the Lime investigation.
Kim also stated that he testified about lobbying opposition influential politicians, financial sector figures, and prosecutors during the prosecution investigation, but the prosecution did not properly investigate and covered up the case.
Within political and prosecution circles, multiple figures are being mentioned regarding which current opposition lawmakers or politicians with prosecution backgrounds were lobbying targets of Kim, and which prosecutors who received drinking parties actually participated in the Lime investigation team.
Immediately after Kim’s disclosure, Justice Minister Choo Mi-ae ordered the Ministry of Justice to directly begin an internal inspection of the prosecutors implicated in the allegations to ensure a thorough fact-finding.
On the previous day, Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl instructed the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors’ Office to “swiftly investigate the ‘prosecutor misconduct allegations’ and strictly and thoroughly determine whether there is any criminal liability.”
Following Kim’s revelations, the ruling party stated, “This shows why the urgent launch of the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) is necessary,” expressing distrust in the prosecution’s current lobbying investigation.
Conversely, the opposition suspects the statement was politically motivated, citing the use of terms like ‘Yoon Seok-youl faction’ in Kim’s statement, and is calling for the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate the lobbying allegations involving political and prosecution figures related to Lime.
Since both ruling and opposition parties find it difficult to trust the prosecution’s investigation, the National Assembly hearing is expected to feature harsh criticism of the prosecution from both sides.
Clashes Expected Over Choo Mi-ae’s Son Case and Media-Prosecution Collusion Case
Meanwhile, regarding the allegations of ‘failure to return from leave’ by Minister Choo’s son and the Seoul Eastern District Prosecutors’ Office’s decision to clear Minister Choo, her son, and a former aide of charges, opposition lawmakers are expected to renew their criticism, arguing that despite clear evidence such as KakaoTalk conversations, the prosecution conducted a ‘lenient investigation.’
In particular, opposition lawmakers are likely to question the flawed investigation process that concluded with a no-charge decision after only one written inquiry into Minister Choo, without conducting raids to secure key evidence such as her son’s medical certificates, accepting voluntary submissions belatedly, and failing to clarify facts through confrontational investigations amid conflicting testimonies from related parties like duty soldiers.
The ‘media-prosecution collusion’ investigation by the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, which has yet to indict Prosecutor Han Dong-hoon despite several months passing since Channel A’s former reporter Lee Dong-jae was prosecuted for ‘attempted coercion,’ is also likely to face opposition attacks.
This case is notable because Minister Choo stripped Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl of his investigative authority and entrusted full control to Lee Sung-yoon, head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office. Opposition lawmakers are expected to criticize Lee for failing to indict Prosecutor Han as a co-conspirator.
Moreover, despite the prosecution review committee’s overwhelming majority recommending the suspension of the investigation and non-prosecution of Prosecutor Han, judging that he could not be considered a co-conspirator in Lee’s ‘attempted coercion’ charge, the investigation has been delayed under the pretext of mobile phone forensic analysis, drawing further criticism.
Questions are also expected regarding the internal disciplinary process for Deputy Chief Prosecutor Jeong Jin-ung of the Gwangju District Prosecutors’ Office (former head of the Criminal Division 1 at Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office), who is accused of ‘abuse of authority’ during a physical altercation in the seizure of Prosecutor Han’s mobile phone SIM card, directed at Seoul High Prosecutors’ Office Chief Cho Sang-chul.
Opposition lawmakers will also likely question Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office Chief Lee Sung-yoon about why he failed to promptly report key evidence and testimonies related to the Optimus internal documents and other major cases to Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl, and why the Optimus case was initially assigned to the Investigation Division 1 rather than the Intelligence Investigation Division.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
