Handonghun's 'Surgical Operation Style' Prosecution Personnel... Coexistence of Criticism for Favoring Yoon Line

Investigation and Trial Focused Reorganization... Pressure on Han Dongsu, 'Hardline' Inspection Sections 1 and 3 Chiefs Replaced
Will the Neglect of 'Criminal, Public Security, and Planning' Continue... Rising Dissatisfaction Depends on Follow-up Personnel Changes

[Asia Economy Reporter Heo Kyung-jun] The first senior prosecutor personnel reshuffle carried out by Minister of Justice Han Dong-hoon since his inauguration is being evaluated as a ‘surgical’ personnel move that only excised the problematic parts. It reflects Minister Han’s repeated emphasis that ‘investigations should be conducted like surgery’.

On the 19th, inside and outside the prosecution, there are reactions that Minister Han has excluded some senior officials suspected of political bias from frontline positions, thereby initiating a renewal of the atmosphere.

The core of this personnel reshuffle lies in Minister Han’s precise understanding of the current organizational situation and his minimal personnel changes aimed at creating a structure that allows the prosecution to focus on its fundamental duties of investigation and trial. There is also analysis that this is a preliminary step for a large-scale follow-up reshuffle. To allow the next Prosecutor General’s opinions to be reflected, promotions and transfers were minimized, and only essential personnel changes were made.

First, those who had fostered division within the organization, such as Shim Jae-cheol, Chief Prosecutor of Seoul Southern District Prosecutors’ Office (27th Judicial Research and Training Institute class), Lee Jung-hyun, Head of the Public Investigation Department at the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office (27th class), and Lee Jong-geun, Chief Prosecutor of Seoul Western District Prosecutors’ Office (28th class), were excluded from frontline positions. The 2nd to 4th Deputy Chief Prosecutors of Seoul Central District Prosecutors’ Office, who are handling sensitive ongoing investigations, were also completely replaced.

At the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office, Han Dong-soo, Head of the Inspection Department who led the disciplinary action against President Yoon Seok-youl when he was Prosecutor General, and only the Inspection Section Chiefs 1 and 3 who worked closely with Han were removed. Within the prosecution, this personnel move is regarded as meticulous, as Minister Han completed gathering information on the frontline and removed only problematic officials. The positions of Inspection Section Chiefs 1 and 3 at the Supreme Prosecutors’ Office were filled by Jung Hee-do, Chief of the Middle Investigation Unit at Seoul Eastern District Prosecutors’ Office (31st class), and Bae Moon-gi, Chief of Criminal Division 1 at Incheon District Prosecutors’ Office (32nd class), both known within the prosecution as hardliners. These two are expected to serve as checks on Han.

The promotion and appointment of Han Seok-ri, a professor at the Judicial Research and Training Institute with extensive experience in criminal and trial work (28th class), to Chief Prosecutor is seen as placing personnel appropriately. It is interpreted as a message that criminal division prosecutors can also be sufficiently valued based on their abilities in future personnel moves.

Prosecutor B said, "The minister’s message to just work hard is clear, and there is no disagreement that this personnel reshuffle placed those recognized for their abilities in the truly necessary positions."

Criticism has also been raised that the so-called ‘Yoon Seok-youl line’ special investigation prosecutors have advanced, suggesting this was a personnel move based on factional alignment. The first reshuffle is expected to be a barometer for follow-up personnel changes, and there are concerns that the trend of neglecting most criminal, public security, and planning prosecutors might continue. However, internally, since the Prosecutor General’s personnel changes have not yet been announced and promotions, transfers, and mid-level personnel changes remain, it is considered premature to make definitive judgments.

Ultimately, whether internal dissatisfaction intensifies is expected to depend on the upcoming follow-up personnel moves. Prosecutor B said, "There is much approval for the replacement with capable prosecutors, but criticism also coexists that certain individuals have again taken key positions. We cannot evaluate this reshuffle alone; we need to see how criminal, public security, and female prosecutors are treated in the follow-up personnel changes."