Yoon Seok-yeol Era Had Fewer Bar Exam Passers Than Lee Jae-myung Era... Yoo Si-min Reported for Saying the Opposite

287 Final Passers under Yoon Seok-yeol, 300 under Lee Jae-myung
Number of Judicial Exam Passers Exceeds 1,000 Since 2004

On October 21 last year, Yoo Si-min, former director of the Roh Moo-hyun Foundation, who was indicted on charges of defaming Prosecutor General Han Dong-hoon, appeared at the first trial held at the Seoul Western District Court in Mapo-gu, Seoul, and responded to questions from the press. Photo by Moon Ho-nam munonam@

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] About 10 days before the 20th presidential election, former Roh Moo-hyun Foundation director Yoo Si-min was reported for allegedly spreading false information about Yoon Seok-yeol, the People Power Party's presidential candidate, during a TV appearance.

He stated that Lee Jae-myung, the Democratic Party presidential candidate, passed the bar exam when 300 people were admitted, while Yoon passed when 1,000 were admitted, claiming "there is a significant difference in general intelligence." However, in fact, both passed when about 300 people were admitted, and the actual final number of successful candidates was even lower when Yoon passed.

The civic group Action Alliance for Establishing the Rule of Law (Representative Lee Jong-bae) filed a complaint against former director Yoo at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office on the 1st for violating the Public Official Election Act by spreading false information and defamation by spreading false information via the Information and Communications Network Act.

Representative Lee said, "On February 24, 2022, former Roh Moo-hyun Foundation director Yoo Si-min appeared on MBC's 'News Outside' and claimed, 'The strength is being smart. Candidate Yoon passed on his ninth attempt when 1,000 were admitted, and candidate Lee passed on his second attempt when 300 were admitted. There is a big difference there.' He also claimed that Yoon 'does not seem intellectually outstanding.'"

He continued, "However, the number of successful candidates for the 33rd bar exam in 1991, when candidate Yoon finally passed, was about 300, the same as candidate Lee. Therefore, former director Yoo's claim that 'he passed on his ninth attempt when 1,000 were admitted' is clearly false. Also, the number of attempts to pass the bar exam and intellectual ability are hardly related, so this is a very malicious logical leap."

Representative Lee added, "Therefore, former director Yoo spreading false information on a terrestrial broadcast program and linking the number of attempts with intellectual ability to make insulting claims constitutes publishing false facts to disadvantage candidate Yoon 'with the intent to prevent his election,' violating Article 250 of the Public Official Election Act, and defaming candidate Yoon through the information and communications network. Hence, we are filing a criminal complaint against former director Yoo for violating the Public Official Election Act and defamation by spreading false information under the Information and Communications Network Act."

Article 250, Paragraph 2 of the Public Official Election Act (False Information Publication Crime) states, "Anyone who, with the intent to prevent election, publishes or causes to be published false facts about a candidate, his spouse, direct ascendants or descendants, or siblings, or possesses propaganda documents containing false facts for distribution, shall be punished by imprisonment for up to seven years or a fine of 5 million to 30 million won."

Also, Article 70, Paragraph 2 of the Information and Communications Network Act (Penalties) states, "Anyone who publicly defames another person by revealing false facts through the information and communications network with the intent to slander shall be punished by imprisonment for up to seven years, suspension of qualifications for up to ten years, or a fine of up to 5 million won."

Representative Lee said, "Despite numerous articles pointing out that former director Yoo's claims on the broadcast were false, he has not made efforts to correct them or apologize to candidate Yoon, which clearly shows that he intentionally spread false information to cause Yoon's defeat."

He also stated, "Considering that former director Yoo belongs to the same political camp as candidate Lee, has consistently supported candidate Lee, and criticized candidate Yoon, it is clear that he published false information with the intent to prevent Yoon's election. By claiming that 'candidate Lee passed the bar exam when 300 were admitted on his second attempt, while candidate Yoon passed when 1,000 were admitted on his ninth attempt,' and implying that candidate Yoon is intellectually inferior to candidate Lee, he caused voters who value intellectual ability in presidential candidates to have a negative perception, thereby disadvantaging candidate Yoon in the election."

Finally, Representative Lee emphasized, "There must be no unfair or illegal acts in elections, which are the flower of democracy. The impact of a word from a prominent social figure like former director Yoo is very strong and significant, so his act of spreading false information is a very serious election crime that can negatively influence voters and cloud their judgment."

Number of Judicial Examination Passers by Year.

28th Bar Exam When Lee Jae-myung Passed: 300 Final Passers · 33rd Bar Exam When Yoon Seok-yeol Passed: 287 Final Passers

Meanwhile, candidate Lee, who graduated from Chung-Ang University Law School after passing the high school equivalency exam, passed the 28th bar exam in 1986. The final number of successful candidates for the 28th bar exam was 300.

On the other hand, candidate Yoon, who graduated from Seoul Chung-Ahm High School and Seoul National University Law School, passed the 33rd bar exam in 1991. The final number of successful candidates for the 33rd bar exam was actually fewer than the 28th, at 287.

Former director Yoo completely reversed the objectively verifiable number of successful candidates in his statement.

The government increased the number of bar exam passers from the 38th bar exam held in 1996, which had maintained the number around 300. The number of successful candidates for the 37th bar exam was 308, but it increased to 502 for the 38th, and further increased to 604 for the 39th bar exam held the following year.

Afterward, the number of successful candidates increased annually to between 700 and 900, and the final number exceeded 1,000 starting from the 46th bar exam in 2004.

Lee Jong-bae, representative of the Legal Reform Network, also filed a complaint against former director Yoo in August 2020 for defamation by spreading false information.

The issue at that time was former director Yoo's statement on YouTube and radio broadcasts that "the prosecution looked into the accounts of the Roh Moo-hyun Foundation."

This was because it was a clear false statement that defamed former Seoul Central District Prosecutor General Bae Seong-beom and former head of the Anti-Corruption and Strong Crime Division at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Han Dong-hoon, whom Yoo had pointed out at the time.

Former director Yoo admitted the falsehood of his statement and eventually apologized on January 22 of last year.

At that time, he stated in a press release distributed through the foundation, "Everyone has the right to raise suspicions, but when exercising that right, they must bear the burden of proof. However, I failed to prove the suspicions I raised. I judge that those suspicions were not true."

He added, "Above all, I sincerely apologize to all prosecution officials for raising suspicions that were not true and caused suspicion that the prosecution surveilled me. I do not think an apology alone is sufficient, and I will humbly accept any form of accountability."

However, the Seoul Western District Prosecutors' Office, which investigated the case, indicted former director Yoo last May for defamation by spreading false information.

At the first preparatory hearing, Yoo's lawyer denied the charges, arguing, "In context, the criticism was directed at the prosecution's official duties and the entire state agency, not at a single prosecutor."

Former director Yoo, who had admitted that the suspicions he raised were false and said he would humbly accept any responsibility, also expressed dissatisfaction with the prosecution's indictment during an interview with reporters at the first trial in October last year, saying, "I think it is unreasonable for the prosecution to indict, but since they have indicted, I will fight it."