'Rhyme Core' Kim Bong-hyun's Arrest Warrant Dismissed Again: "Bail Decision Must Be Respected"

Court: "No Change in Circumstances Justifying Bail Revocation"

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Yoo Byung-don] The prosecution's arrest warrant for Kim Bong-hyun, former chairman of Star Mobility and a key figure in the Lime Asset Management scandal involving a suspension of redemptions worth about 1.6 trillion won, was once again dismissed by the court.

On the 12th, Kwon Ki-man, the judge in charge of warrants at the Seoul Southern District Court, held a pre-arrest hearing for Kim, who is accused of fraud and violation of the Act on the Regulation of Conducting Fund-Raising Business without Permission. The judge stated, "Since the related case is currently undergoing a first trial and there has been no reason to revoke the bail decision after it was granted," adding, "It is also difficult to see any risk of evidence destruction," thus explaining the reason for dismissal.

Earlier, the Seoul Southern District Prosecutors' Office announced on the 7th that it had re-requested an arrest warrant for Kim on charges including fraud. This was about two weeks after the court dismissed the warrant on the 20th of last month. The prosecution explained the re-request by saying, "There are sufficient grounds and necessity for detention," but the second dismissal was a blow to their credibility.

Previously, the prosecution had requested a pre-arrest warrant for him on the 14th of last month on charges of deceiving about 350 people by promising principal and returns on investments in unlisted stocks between 2017 and 2018, embezzling approximately 9 billion won.

At the first pre-arrest hearing, Hong Jin-pyo, the judge in charge of warrants at the Seoul Southern District Court, stated, "Although the charges are serious and appear to be substantially proven, it is not easy to consider there is a risk of evidence destruction," and "Considering that it is difficult to conclude that bail conditions were violated over more than a year, it is hard to see the necessity and appropriateness of detention at this stage," thus dismissing the warrant.