[Seocho-dong Legal Talk] Partial Raids, Mass Summons... The Unfathomable Intentions of the Prosecution

Last Month's Hwacheon Daeyu Search Excluded Locations Related to Seongnam City Hall and Kim Man-bae

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyung-min] "I hope you will drop your doubts."

Park Beom-gye, Minister of Justice, has been pleading daily, asking people to trust the sincerity of the special investigation team formed at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office to handle the ‘Daejang-dong development preferential treatment and lobbying’ allegations. Regarding the bias of the investigation team, which is composed of prosecutors with a ‘pro-government’ inclination, he called it "an unfounded story," and he praised the swift arrest of former Seongnam Urban Development Corporation Planning Director Yoo Dong-gyu as "prompt."

As Minister Park said, the prosecution is investigating the Daejang-dong allegations with enthusiasm. At least from an external perspective, it appears so.

The legal community's view differs from that of Minister Park. The question marks that arose from the beginning of the investigation have not easily disappeared. Lawyers who are former chief prosecutors and have led investigations unanimously say, "There are more than one or two unclear points." First, the dominant evaluation is that the search and seizure was effectively ‘half-hearted.’ On the 29th of last month, the prosecution conducted a large-scale search and seizure related to the Daejang-dong allegations. They searched the residence and office of former Director Yoo, as well as the office of Hwacheon Daeyu Asset Management. However, locations related to Seongnam City Hall and Kim Man-bae, the major shareholder of Hwacheon Daeyu, were excluded. The prosecution selectively conducted searches without examining all related locations.

Some even analyze that this could be a fatal blow to the prosecution's investigation. Despite these two places being considered the top priorities for search and seizure by the legal community and others when the allegations first surfaced, the prosecution ignored them.

The starting point of the Daejang-dong allegations was Seongnam City Hall. It is known that the Seongnam City Administrative Planning Bureau created an investment approval report in January 2015 for the Daejang-dong and First Industrial Complex combined urban development project, which was approved by then-Mayor Lee Jae-myung of Seongnam. A month later, they issued a public recruitment guideline and proceeded with the selection process for private developers. Naturally, documents related to this process are suspected to still remain at Seongnam City Hall, yet the prosecution does not seem to intend to secure them.

The search and seizure of former Director Yoo's residence and the arrest process are also questionable. The prosecution did not search Yoo's family home but only the officetel he rented in September. It is doubtful how many important documents could have been in an officetel he had lived in for only about a month. The mobile phone that Yoo allegedly threw out the window was not recovered, and there were reports that the prosecution conducted a 2-3 hour interview inside the house before the search, which caused controversy. The prosecution denied these claims, but suspicions remain.

Typically, prosecution investigations proceed in the order of search and seizure followed by summoning and interrogating related persons. They should present the analyzed search and seizure materials to the persons involved and conduct a ‘high-level psychological warfare’ by asking pressing questions. Following this flow, the prosecution plans to summon and investigate a large number of people by next week. The day before, they summoned and questioned Lee Seong-moon, former CEO of Hwacheon Daeyu; Kim Moon-gi, Head of Development Division 1 at Seongnam Urban Development Corporation; and Lee Han-sung, representative of Cheonhwa Dongin No. 1. If the search and seizure was half-hearted, the materials will inevitably be insufficient. There is concern about how meaningful statements can be obtained during the summons and investigation. Considering these circumstances, the only cards the prosecution effectively holds are the 19 recorded conversations provided by accountant Jeong Young-hak. Can they really uncover all the allegations with just these? That too is uncertain. Does the prosecution have a plan?