Supreme Court Confirms Jeong Jin-woong's Innocence in Han Dong-hoon 'Official Violence' Charge

Jung Jin-woong, Research Fellow at the Judicial Research and Training Institute. / Photo by Hyunmin Kim kimhyun81@

[Asia Economy Reporter Choi Seok-jin, Legal Affairs Specialist] The acquittal of Jeong Jin-woong, a research fellow at the Legal Research and Training Institute (54, Judicial Research and Training Institute class 29), who was prosecuted on charges of assaulting and injuring Minister of Justice Han Dong-hoon during a search and seizure operation, has been finalized.

The Supreme Court's First Division (Presiding Justice Park Jeong-hwa) dismissed the prosecution's appeal and upheld the lower court's verdict of not guilty in the final hearing of the appeal trial for Jeong, who was charged with official assault under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes.

The court stated, "There is no error in the lower court's judgment that the prosecution failed to prove the victim's injury and the defendant's intent regarding official assault beyond a reasonable doubt, nor did it violate the principles of logic and experience or exceed the limits of free evaluation of evidence, nor did it misinterpret the law concerning intent and injury in official assault."

Jeong was non-detained indicted on July 29, 2020, on charges of assaulting Minister Han and causing injury during the seizure of Han's newly purchased mobile phone's SIM card following the first search and seizure by the prosecution (official assault under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes).

At that time, Jeong, along with another prosecutor and four investigators, conducted the search and seizure on Minister Han. While Han was reviewing the search warrant, he tried to call his lawyer with Jeong's permission to have the lawyer participate in the execution of the search warrant. However, Jeong mistakenly believed that Han's act of unlocking his phone's password was an attempt to destroy evidence by deleting apps like KakaoTalk or Telegram. Jeong then lunged at Han, who was sitting on a sofa, forcibly trying to take back the phone. Both fell to the floor together, and Jeong ended up pinning Han down.

The prosecution, based on Han's medical certificate, judged that Han sustained injuries such as a ligament sprain in the neck requiring three weeks of treatment and applied charges of official assault under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes.

Jeong was the chief prosecutor of the Criminal Division 1 at the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, responsible for investigating the so-called 'Channel A coercion attempt' case, also known as the 'prosecutor-media collusion' case. Unusually, he personally went to the Legal Research and Training Institute's Yongin branch, where Minister Han worked, to conduct the search and seizure, during which this incident occurred.

Notably, then Minister of Justice Choo Mi-ae stated, "There is more than enough evidence (of prosecutor-media collusion)," and shortly after Jeong said, "We have secured many important pieces of evidence during the investigation and are substantially approaching the substantive truth of the prosecutor-media collusion." Jeong, as the investigation team leader, personally conducting the search to secure additional evidence led to speculation around the prosecution that the investigation team might not have secured decisive evidence yet.

In the first trial, the court found the prosecution's proof insufficient regarding Han's injury and acquitted Jeong of official assault under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes. However, it convicted him of official assault under the Criminal Act, which does not require injury as an element, sentencing Jeong to four months in prison with a one-year probation and a one-year suspension of qualifications.

The court pointed out, "The defendant assaulted the victim based on a subjective judgment that the victim was attempting to destroy evidence without exercising minimal caution as to whether the use of physical force during the execution of the search warrant was justified. Physical force against the body of the person subject to seizure must be strictly limited not only during detention but also during the execution of a search warrant, making the defendant's actions highly blameworthy."

It added, "Moreover, the defendant has not reflected on his actions, claiming they were justified during the investigation and trial, and has made no efforts to restore the victim."

Article 4-2(1) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes stipulates that if official assault under Article 125 of the Criminal Act causes injury, it shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year.

Article 125 (Assault and Cruel Acts) of the Criminal Act states that a person performing duties related to detention, such as prosecutors or police officers, who assaults a criminal suspect shall be punished more severely than ordinary assault, with imprisonment of up to five years and suspension of qualifications for up to ten years.

In court, Jeong's defense argued that the 'duty' in Article 125 of the Criminal Act refers to duties related to detention and thus does not apply to acts during search and seizure. They also claimed Jeong lacked intent for official assault, but these arguments were rejected.

They further argued that even if the elements of official assault were met, the act was justified under Article 20 of the Criminal Act or constituted a mistake of fact regarding justification (a mistake about the existence of circumstances justifying the act), which would negate criminal intent. These claims were also rejected.

However, the second trial reversed the outcome.

The appellate court also rejected Jeong's other claims (related to duty, justification, and mistake of fact) but, unlike the first trial, found it difficult to recognize Jeong's intent or even conditional intent for official assault and acquitted him.

The appellate court stated, "Based solely on the evidence submitted by the prosecution, it is difficult to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had intent (including conditional intent) for official assault at the time of the incident. Therefore, the lower court's judgment is hard to accept, and the defendant's appeal grounds pointing this out are valid."

The court noted that before the search, Jeong expected, based on information from investigators, that Minister Han would unlock his iPhone using facial recognition and immediately call his lawyer. When Han appeared to enter a password, Jeong mistakenly thought he was deleting KakaoTalk or Telegram conversations or uninstalling the apps. Thus, when Jeong first tried to seize Han's phone, his intention was only to secure the phone to achieve the purpose of the search.

Although it was acknowledged that Jeong continued to try to seize Han's phone while they fell to the floor in a piled-up state, with Han pinned under Jeong, considering their positions and the height of the sofa, it was possible that Jeong lost balance while moving in the direction Han was avoiding and fell onto Han's body.

The court said, "It cannot be ruled out that the force accompanying the defendant's fall combined with the victim's posture, who was reaching out with the opposite hand, caused both to slip from the sofa to the floor."

In conclusion, the court judged, "It is difficult to definitively state that the defendant had the internal intention to recognize and accept the risk of causing physical force to the victim's body during the process of securing the phone."

However, the court pointed out, "Objective verification conducted immediately after the incident suggests there was no attempt by the victim to destroy evidence, so the defendant's actions cannot be considered appropriate."

The Supreme Court also agreed with the appellate court's judgment.

Meanwhile, Minister Han, who was investigated in the 'Channel A coercion attempt' case, was cleared of charges, and former Channel A reporter Lee Dong-jae, who was prosecuted, was acquitted in the first trial and is undergoing the second trial.