Kim Sunam, Lee Dubong, and Others' 7-Year Statute of Limitations on Abuse of Authority Passed
"Abuse of Authority Is an Immediate Offense; Appeals Are Not Illegal" Conclusion
[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] The High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Unit (HCIC) has decided not to prosecute former and current prosecutors accused by Yoo Woo-sung, a victim of the Seoul City government official espionage fabrication case, who claimed he was subjected to 'retaliatory prosecution.'
On the 29th, the HCIC Investigation Division 3 (Chief Prosecutor Kim Seon-gyu) dismissed the charges against four individuals?former Prosecutor General Kim Soo-nam, former Daejeon High Prosecutor Lee Doo-bong, former Seoul Western District Prosecutor Shin Yoo-chul, and Deputy Chief Prosecutor of Suwon District Prosecutor's Office Anyang Branch Ahn Dong-wan?who were accused by Yoo of abuse of authority and obstruction of rights.
Kim and others had been investigated on charges of abuse of authority for allegedly abusing their prosecutorial powers by reopening and prosecuting Yoo's North Korea remittance charges (violation of the Foreign Exchange Transactions Act), which had been previously suspended in 2010, after Yoo was acquitted in 2014 of espionage charges due to evidence fabrication by the National Intelligence Service.
At the time of Yoo's prosecution, Deputy Chief Prosecutor Ahn was the case prosecutor, former High Prosecutor Lee was the head of the Criminal Division 2 at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, former Prosecutor Shin was the first deputy chief prosecutor at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, and former Prosecutor General Kim was the head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, each part of the approval chain.
After investigating the case for a year since November last year, the HCIC concluded that although the Supreme Court recognized in October last year that the prosecution was an abuse of prosecutorial rights, the statute of limitations had already expired on May 8 of last year, seven years after the prosecution date of May 9, 2014.
The HCIC examined whether the abuse of authority charge could be considered a continuing offense with a different statute of limitations start date or whether the statute of limitations was suspended until the Supreme Court ruling. However, it concluded that abuse of authority is an instant offense (status offense) for which the statute of limitations begins immediately upon completion of the criminal act, and it is difficult to apply statute of limitations exceptions that are only recognized for crimes such as murder or sexual offenses against children under 13. Suspension of the statute of limitations is only recognized when prosecution is initiated, the suspect flees abroad, or a retrial request is made.
Meanwhile, some argued that the prosecution's acts of maintaining the charges through appeals or Supreme Court appeals after the initial prosecution of Yoo could be considered separate abuses of authority with remaining statute of limitations. However, the HCIC judged that appeals by the prosecution due to sentencing issues or appeals against abuse of prosecutorial rights decisions cannot be regarded as illegal or improper exercise of appeal rights.
Regarding Deputy Chief Prosecutor Ahn, the investigating prosecutor, the HCIC confirmed his participation in the trial due to a duty substitution order following a first-instance jury trial, and found no evidence that the other suspects were involved illegally or improperly in the appeal and Supreme Court appeal processes.
The HCIC stated that from May to June this year, it conducted witness investigations of the complainant and North Korean human rights organization affiliates, followed by two rounds of investigations of Yoo and witness investigations of the appellate prosecutors from July to September, and conducted written investigations of the suspects in September.
Additionally, after securing and reviewing materials from the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Past Affairs Committee last month, the HCIC finalized the case following deliberations by the HCIC Prosecution Review Committee.
Yoo, of Chinese-Korean descent who defected from North Korea in 2004, worked as a contract public official for Seoul City from 2011 and was arrested and prosecuted in 2013 on charges of violating the National Security Act by allegedly passing information about domestic North Korean defectors to the North Korean State Security Department through his younger brother Yoo Ga-ryeo.
However, during the trial, it was revealed that some evidence submitted by the prosecution from the National Intelligence Service was fabricated, leading to Yoo's acquittal.
As the legitimacy of the investigation into Yoo's case was questioned, the Criminal Division 2 of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office reopened the case in May 2014, prosecuting Yoo again on charges that had been suspended four years earlier.
The first trial court found Yoo guilty of the North Korea remittance charges, but the appellate court dismissed the prosecution, finding no grounds to overturn the previous suspension of prosecution. The Supreme Court also ruled in October last year that "the prosecutor exercised prosecutorial rights arbitrarily," deeming the prosecution illegal.
The HCIC also revealed that the Prosecution Review Committee convened before this case disposition concluded that the statute of limitations for the initial prosecution had already expired and that the appeals and Supreme Court appeals were not illegal.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
