Indictment of Yoo Dong-gyu Excludes Core Charge of 'Breach of Trust'... Prosecution Faces Controversy Over Inadequate Investigation and Indictment

[Asia Economy Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist Reporter, Kim Hyung-min Reporter] "This is dereliction of duty.", "Isn't this grounds for disciplinary action?"

The prosecution, investigating the lobbying and preferential treatment allegations related to the Daejang-dong development in Seongnam City, has faced fierce criticism from both inside and outside since indicting Yoo Dong-gyu, former Planning Director of Seongnam Urban Development Corporation, on the 21st.

Yoo, the first person related to Daejang-dong to be indicted, holds symbolic significance and serves as a gauge for the direction of future investigations and trials.

However, the prosecution, unable to shake off accusations of a sloppy investigation, has been heavily criticized for a deficient indictment and a half-hearted prosecution after failing to include key issues in the charges.

A current prosecutor, identified as A, said on the 22nd, "It is indeed unusual for core charges specified in the warrant to be omitted from the indictment," adding, "This investigation somehow feels hastily put together."

Regarding the exclusion of the key embezzlement charge from the indictment, political interpretations suggest it was to exclude links to Lee Jae-myung, the ruling party's presidential candidate and Governor of Gyeonggi Province.

A prosecution clerk, B, said, "There are various ways such as later amending the indictment, but removing the embezzlement charge raises suspicions of other intentions," adding, "Depending on the court's judgment, the prosecution might not be able to add the embezzlement charge later even if they want to."

A criminal law specialist lawyer also pointed out, "Removing the embezzlement charge entirely is problematic." While it is not uncommon for charges listed in an arrest warrant to differ from those in the indictment, it is rare for the entire factual basis to be omitted.

The Supreme Court has ruled in a case where a person was arrested on embezzlement charges but indicted on fraud charges that "the effect of an arrest warrant applies to the charges stated in the warrant and the social facts underlying those charges, as long as they are fundamentally the same."

Kim Jong-min, a lawyer and former prosecutor, claimed, "In an ordinary case, this would be a serious mistake warranting disciplinary action during the prosecution's regular audit," adding, "The charges were clear, yet neither investigation nor indictment was conducted. This is an abuse of prosecutorial authority."

The dedicated investigation team at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office indicted Yoo on charges of bribery and promise of receiving money after improper conduct under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes on the previous day.

The prosecution had applied the embezzlement charge against Yoo when requesting an arrest warrant on the 2nd for failing to implement measures to recover excess profits, causing damage to Seongnam City, but did not include it in the indictment.

Regarding bribery charges, unlike the initial arrest warrant request, the allegation of receiving 500 million KRW from Kim Man-bae, major shareholder of Hwacheon Daeyu, was completely omitted, and the charge of receiving 300 million KRW from Jeong Jae-chang, major shareholder of Wirye New Town Asset Management, was changed to receiving 352 million KRW from a Daejang-dong development company.

Regarding the omission of the embezzlement charge in Yoo's indictment, a prosecution official explained, "It was not omitted from the indictment but separated for future prosecution."

Since investigations into co-conspirators of the embezzlement charge are ongoing, indicting Yoo alone first would change his status to a defendant entitled to defense rights, making summons and investigations difficult. Also, to indict on embezzlement, the division of acts among co-conspirators must be specified, so they plan to indict Yoo together with other co-conspirators after clearly confirming this. The official added, "Since the court is particularly cautious in judging embezzlement charges, we intend to handle it with more sufficient evidence and solid legal reasoning."

The investigation team conducted a search and seizure at the Seongnam mayor's office the previous day. They also summoned and conducted confrontation investigations with the so-called 'Daejang-dong Four'?major shareholder Kim Man-bae of Hwacheon Daeyu, Yoo, lawyer Nam Wook, and accountant Jeong Young-hak?simultaneously. The team is expected to summon key suspects again to verify conflicting statements.