Prosecutors and Public Corruption Investigation Office Face Consecutive Warrant Defeats

Son Junsung Arrest Warrant Rejected by Court
Kim Manbae's Warrant Also Denied on 14th
Careful Judgment Due to Presidential Candidate Involvement
Seen as 'Warning Message on Inadequate Investigation'

Son Joon-sung, the Human Rights Protection Officer at Daegu High Prosecutors' Office and a key figure in the 'Solicitation of Prosecution' allegations during former Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-yeol's tenure, is attending the warrant hearing held on the 26th at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul. Photo by Kang Jin-hyung aymsdream@

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Hyung-min] The arrest warrants requested by the prosecution and the High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Agency (HOCI), which are investigating the so-called ‘Daejang-dong scandal’ and the ‘accusation inducement scandal,’ were consecutively rejected by the court.

In legal circles, there is talk that "this should be seen as a warning message to prevent the excessive issuance of warrants and to indicate that warrants will not be granted if the investigations by the prosecution and HOCI are not properly conducted." On the 26th, the Seoul Central District Court dismissed the arrest warrant requested by HOCI for Son Joon-sung, a key figure in the ‘accusation inducement’ scandal and former Investigation Information Policy Officer at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office (currently Human Rights Protection Officer at Daegu High Prosecutors' Office). Earlier, on the 14th, the court also refused to issue an arrest warrant to the prosecution for Kim Man-bae, the major shareholder of Hwacheon Daeyu Asset Management (Hwacheon Daeyu), who is involved in the ‘Daejang-dong development preferential treatment and lobbying’ allegations.

Since all the cases related to the rejected arrest warrants involved presidential candidates, the court had to exercise particular caution in its deliberations. For this reason, it appears that the court applied stricter standards when reviewing the arrest warrants requested by the prosecution and HOCI.

There are also criticisms that the charges presented by the prosecution and HOCI were insufficient, failing to overcome the court's scrutiny.

According to legal sources, the criminal facts in Son’s arrest warrant included difficult-to-understand content. For example, it stated that former Prosecutor General Yoon Seok-youl directed the investigation of allegations against former Minister of Justice Cho Kuk’s family during his tenure and ordered the Human Rights Department of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office, rather than the Inspection Department, to investigate the so-called ‘media collusion’ case. None of these are related to the accusation inducement allegations against Son. Kim Man-bae’s arrest warrant lacked detailed charges. Although it cited breach of trust, the amount involved was listed as ‘unknown.’ The prosecution hastily drafted the warrant without conducting account tracing, eager to detain Kim.

The judges in charge of warrants dismissed these arrest warrants, citing reasons such as "it is difficult to see the necessity of detention to the extent that it overrides the suspect’s right to defense." It appears they took issue with the insufficiently prepared charges presented by the investigative agencies.

With the dismissal of the arrest warrants, investigations by the prosecution and HOCI have encountered difficulties. They may also feel burdened in requesting new or reissued warrants. With many key figures still requiring arrest warrants, they will have to pay special attention to the description of charges. The prosecution plans to reapply for Kim Man-bae’s arrest warrant and secure the custody of lawyer Nam Wook. HOCI is also reportedly planning to reapply for Son’s arrest warrant and summon Kim Woong, a member of the People Power Party, for questioning.

However, if these arrest warrants are dismissed again, the investigations by the prosecution and HOCI will face further hardship. A criminal defense attorney emphasized, "Since many individuals are involved in both the Daejang-dong and accusation inducement cases, it is safe to say that the court deciding on detention holds the ‘casting vote’ in the investigations."