[Asia Economy Reporter Baek Kyunghwan] A Seoul National University professor who was prosecuted for receiving bribes and writing a report claiming the harmfulness of humidifier disinfectants was unclear, from Oxy Reckitt Benckiser (Oxy, now RB Korea), was acquitted by the Supreme Court.
On the 29th, the Supreme Court's 3rd Division (Presiding Justice No Taeak) upheld the lower court's ruling in the appeal trial of Professor Cho Mo (62) of Seoul National University College of Veterinary Medicine, acquitting him of bribery and evidence forgery charges, but affirming his conviction for fraud related to embezzlement of research funds.
Professor Cho was tried on charges of evidence forgery for deliberately omitting experimental data revealing the harmfulness of disinfectant components at Oxy's request in 2011-2012, and writing a report stating that "the causal relationship between humidifier disinfectants and lung damage is not clear." Additionally, he was accused of receiving 12 million KRW from Oxy as a "consulting fee" separately from the 250 million KRW research service fee paid to Seoul National University.
The first trial in September 2016 found all charges against Professor Cho guilty, stating, "As a leading authority in toxicology, he had social and moral responsibilities but violated research ethics by accepting money from Oxy," and sentenced him to 2 years in prison and a fine of 25 million KRW.
In the second trial, the evidence forgery charge was overturned. The court ruled, "It cannot be seen that data was improperly omitted or conclusions were fabricated," and acquitted him of evidence forgery. However, the charge of fraud for embezzling payment for goods unrelated to the research service from Seoul National University's Industry-Academic Cooperation Foundation was upheld as in the first trial, sentencing him to 1 year in prison with 2 years probation.
On this day, the Supreme Court also acquitted him of bribery and evidence forgery charges related to creating a new report by omitting unfavorable experimental data. The court stated, "It is difficult to recognize that evidence was forged, and based solely on the evidence submitted by the prosecution, it is insufficient to conclude that the consulting fee received by the defendant had the nature of compensation for official duties related to this research beyond being a consulting fee." However, the court agreed with the lower court's judgment that Professor Cho deceived Seoul National University's Industry-Academic Cooperation Foundation to receive and embezzle research funds, affirming the fraud conviction.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
