PCC "Judgment Given by Kim Woong to Jo Seong-eun Also Queried by Prosecutors on the Same Day"

On the same day that Kim Woong, a key figure in the so-called 'report solicitation' case from the People Power Party, delivered a real-name judgment document to whistleblower Jo Seong-eun, it was revealed that the prosecution also internally searched for the same judgment document.

[Photo by the High-ranking Officials' Crime Investigation Agency]

The Seoul Central District Court Criminal Division 27 (Presiding Judge Kim Ok-gon) summoned former employee A of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Investigation Information Policy Office (Sujeonggwan Office) as a witness and questioned him on the 12th during the trial of Prosecutor Son Jun-seong.

The Corruption Investigation Office prosecutor asked A about the circumstances of repeatedly searching the real-name judgment document of a person with the surname 'Ji' several times through the internal system around 8:30 a.m. on April 3, 2020, when A was working in the Sujeonggwan Office. A replied, "Investigation Information Officer Kim mentioned the real name of Ji, the whistleblower in the 'Channel A case,' and searched the judgment document." However, A explained that he entered the wrong name in the search window because he misunderstood Officer Kim's words. That day was when Representative Kim delivered Ji's real-name judgment document and the complaint against ruling party figures to Jo.

The Corruption Investigation Office believes that Prosecutor Son, who was then the head of the Supreme Prosecutors' Office Investigation Information Policy Office, ordered staff to search the real-name judgment document and then delivered it to Representative Kim. The prosecutor also asked A whether he knew that other employees in the Sujeonggwan Office searched the real-name judgment document using the correct name as a keyword on the same day. A answered, "I don't know."

Prosecutor Son's defense attorney objected, saying, "Is it appropriate to ask specific questions about unconfirmed facts? This is a typical leading question." The defense attorney reminded that A had previously testified at the Supreme Prosecutors' Office that "I never received instructions regarding the Channel A case, and the search for Ji's real-name judgment document was for personal inquiry." A answered that Prosecutor Son never instructed him to search for Ji.

The report solicitation suspicion involves allegations that about two weeks before the April 15, 2020 general election, the prosecution solicited complaints against pro-democracy figures such as Representative Choi Kang-wook, who was a proportional representative candidate for the Open Democratic Party at the time, and Yoo Si-min, then chairman of the Roh Moo-hyun Foundation. Prosecutor Son was indicted last May on charges including breach of official secrets for delivering complaints against Representative Choi and others to Representative Kim via Telegram.