Cho Hee-yeon Appeared at the Corruption Investigation Office, Fully Denies Charges... "Special Recruitment Conducted Lawfully" (Comprehensive)

Seoul Superintendent of Education Cho Hee-yeon, who is suspected of unfair special hiring of dismissed teachers, is appearing at the High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Department in Gwacheon, Gyeonggi Province on the 27th. / Gwacheon = Photo by Kang Jin-hyung aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] Jo Hee-yeon, Superintendent of Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education, who is accused of abusing his authority in the special hiring process of five dismissed teachers, appeared at the High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Unit (PCC) on the 27th as a suspect and completely denied the allegations.

Arriving at the PCC building in the Government Complex Gwacheon around 8:45 a.m., Superintendent Jo told reporters, “I believe that reinstating teachers who had left their students’ side for over ten years to improve teachers’ rights is an appropriate measure for harmony in the education sector and aligns with social justice,” adding, “My thoughts on this have not changed.”

Superintendent Jo emphasized, “I conducted the special hiring lawfully according to the procedures prescribed by law,” and added, “Although legal advice is usually sought once, I obtained legal advice twice, and since there were no legal issues, I proceeded with the special hiring.” He also stated, “I did not personally gain any benefits from the special hiring.”

Superintendent Jo also expressed dissatisfaction with the PCC investigation.

He said, “I still cannot understand why the Board of Audit and Inspection filed a complaint against me despite issuing a caution for procedural issues,” and “I also have doubts about the PCC initiating the investigation.”

He continued, “I believe there will be many questions and misunderstandings from the PCC today,” and added, “I will sincerely explain everything during today’s investigation to resolve misunderstandings and doubts.”

Superintendent Jo is accused of instructing his chief secretary to allow the special hiring of five dismissed teachers, including four dismissed teachers from the Korean Teachers and Education Workers Union (JeonGyoJo) in 2018, improperly involving himself in the selection of screening committee members, and excluding the then deputy superintendent who opposed this from work (charges of abuse of authority and obstruction of rights and violation of the State Public Officials Act).

Earlier, the Board of Audit and Inspection confirmed these misconducts by Superintendent Jo, filed a complaint with the police for violation of the State Public Officials Act, and provided related misconduct materials to the PCC as reference for investigation.

Following the PCC’s request, the police transferred the case to the PCC, which on April 23 assigned the case number '2021 Gongje 1' and conducted a full-scale investigation, including raiding the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education and summoning related persons for questioning.

Since the PCC does not have the authority to prosecute Superintendent Jo, after completing the investigation, the PCC will send related documents and evidence to a prosecutor at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, which has jurisdiction, and the prosecution will make the final decision on whether to indict.

Meanwhile, Superintendent Jo became the first suspect to stand at the photo line since the PCC was launched. Recently, the PCC announced the Incident Public Relations Guidelines. The disclosure of Superintendent Jo’s attendance schedule and the installation of the photo line were conducted based on these newly announced guidelines.

Article 18, Paragraph 1 of the PCC Incident Public Relations Guidelines generally prohibits the disclosure of attendance information of persons involved in cases. However, Paragraph 4 of the same article allows prior disclosure of attendance situations with the suspect’s consent in important cases already widely known to the public through media reports.

Additionally, Article 19, Paragraph 1 of the guidelines allows the investigating prosecutor to restrict filming, broadcasting, and recording to protect the portrait rights of persons involved in ongoing investigations. Paragraph 2 of the same article permits prior consultation with the suspect or witness regarding the date, method, etc., of attendance in important cases expected to attract intense media coverage, and allows measures such as installing a photo line to prevent confusion and maintain order during media coverage if requested by the suspect or witness.