Prosecutor Jin Hye-won, Accused of 'Secondary Harm' to Park Won-soon's Sexual Harassment Victim, Loses Warning Cancellation Lawsuit

Photo posted by Prosecutor Jin Hyewon on her Facebook in July last year. [Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] Jin Hye-won, deputy chief prosecutor at the Ansan Branch of Suwon District Prosecutors' Office, who was embroiled in a controversy over 'secondary harm' for posting a photo on her social media showing her arm-in-arm with the late former Seoul Mayor Park Won-soon and likening the victim of sexual harassment by Park to a 'kkotbaem' (flower viper), lost the appeal retrial lawsuit seeking cancellation of a warning disposition.

The Administrative Division 9 of the Seoul High Court (Presiding Judges Kim Si-cheol, Lee Kyung-hoon, Song Min-kyung) ruled on the 30th that Jin lost the appeal retrial lawsuit she filed against the Prosecutor General seeking cancellation of the warning disposition.

Earlier, the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Headquarters conducted an integrated audit of the Jeju District Prosecutors' Office in 2017 and issued a warning disposition against Prosecutor Jin, citing that 21 cases of investigative work, including warrant requests and dismissal of some cases, were handled inappropriately.

The following January, Prosecutor Jin filed an objection, but when the Supreme Prosecutors' Office canceled the warning for only 2 of the 21 cases, Jin filed a lawsuit.

The first and second trials ruled in favor of the plaintiff, stating that the warning disposition by the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Inspection Headquarters was excessive, but in February, the Supreme Court overturned the appellate court's decision and remanded the case back to the Seoul High Court.

The reason was that the warning disposition by the Prosecutor General falls within the scope of supervisory authority over prosecutors rather than under the Prosecutor Disciplinary Act, thus within the discretionary range.

The retrial court, reviewing the case again, concluded that there was no problem with the warning disposition against Prosecutor Jin in accordance with the Supreme Court's ruling.