First Case of Prosecution Request by the Corruption Investigation Office Returned by Prosecution
Prosecutors: "Insufficient Evidence Collection and Legal Review"
Corruption Investigation Office: "Prosecutors Should Conduct Supplementary Investigation Before Prosecution or Non-Prosecution Decision"
The prosecution has returned the case to the High-ranking Officials Crime Investigation Office (HOGICO) for further investigation regarding the bribery case involving a senior official of the Board of Audit and Inspection, stating that additional investigation is necessary. HOGICO has responded by refusing to accept the case, which is expected to escalate the conflict. This is the first time the prosecution has returned a case for which HOGICO requested prosecution.
On the 12th, the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office announced, "We have transferred all related documents and evidence of the 'bribery case involving a senior official of the Board of Audit and Inspection' received from HOGICO back to HOGICO."
After reviewing the evidentiary relationships and legal grounds of the investigation records sent by HOGICO, the prosecution judged that the evidence collection and legal review regarding the facts were insufficient to decide whether to prosecute based solely on HOGICO's investigation results so far.
The prosecution stated, "Considering HOGICO's legal status and nature, it is deemed more appropriate for HOGICO to conduct additional investigations to collect evidence or re-examine legal grounds rather than the prosecution conducting separate evidence collection or legal review to reassess and decide on the criminal charges."
Accordingly, the prosecution added opinions on the evidence and legal grounds and transferred all related documents and evidence received from HOGICO back to HOGICO on the same day.
Previously, in November last year, HOGICO requested the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office to prosecute Kim, a Grade 3 official of the Board of Audit and Inspection, and B, the nominal CEO of A Corporation operated by Kim, on charges of bribery under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes and embezzlement under the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes.
After the prosecution's return of the case, HOGICO issued a statement saying, "The prosecution's transfer of the case is an action without any legal basis," and declared, "We will refuse to accept the case."
HOGICO explained, "According to the Constitutional Court precedents, HOGICO prosecutors have an established legal status as prosecutors," and "Under Article 26 of the HOGICO Act, after investigating a case, HOGICO requests prosecution from the prosecution and sends all investigation records and evidence to the prosecution."
They added, "The prosecution should conduct supplementary investigations and then decide on prosecution or non-prosecution," and expressed regret over the prosecution's unilateral decision without any prior discussion or legal basis.
Furthermore, HOGICO noted, "In the past, the prosecution has conducted supplementary investigations such as searches and seizures and made prosecution or non-prosecution decisions in cases where HOGICO requested prosecution, including those involving Cho Hee-yeon, Superintendent of Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education; Kim Seok-jun, former Superintendent of Busan Metropolitan Office of Education; Assemblyman Kim Woong; and former National Intelligence Service Director Park Ji-won."
Under the HOGICO Act, bribery allegations against Grade 3 or higher officials of the Board of Audit and Inspection fall under high-ranking public official crimes that HOGICO can investigate, but the prosecution has the authority to prosecute. HOGICO's prosecution authority is limited to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justices, Prosecutor General, judges, prosecutors, and police officers of rank Superintendent or higher.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
