The appellate trial for Hong Nampyo, the special mayor of Changwon, Gyeongnam, who is accused of bribing a candidate during the nationwide local elections on June 1, 2022, was held on the 16th.
Mayor Hong was brought to trial on charges of conspiring with Mr. A, who was the chief of the election campaign at the time, to promise a public office to Mr. B, who intended to run in the People Power Party's Changwon mayoral primary, in exchange for joining the campaign.
Mr. A was indicted on charges of conspiring with Mayor Hong to offer a public office to Mr. B, who was planning to run as a preliminary candidate, in exchange for joining the campaign.
Mr. B, who reported the two, is also on trial for accepting the offer to join Mayor Hong's campaign and the promise of a public office after being approached by Mr. A.
Hong Nampyo, mayor of Changwon Special City, Gyeongnam, is heading to the courtroom to attend the appeal trial regarding charges of violating the Public Official Election Act. Photo by Lee Seryeong
The 1st Criminal Division of the Changwon branch of the Busan High Court (Presiding Judges Min Dalgi, Kim Changyong, and Kang Youngsun) held two hearings, one in the morning and one in the afternoon, to conduct witness examinations related to the case.
To expedite the proceedings, all eight witnesses, including defendant B, were summoned, but only two, including defendant B, appeared in the morning session.
Only one witness submitted a written excuse for non-attendance due to health reasons, while the remaining five witnesses, including former Changwon Industry Promotion Agency Director Jang Donghwa, did not appear even in the afternoon.
The court decided to withdraw the previously mentioned fine of 2 million won, considering that some witnesses believed they only needed to appear at one of the three hearings scheduled for August.
For witnesses unable to attend due to health reasons, the court decided to cancel the summons in accordance with the opinions of the prosecution and defense.
If a person who has received a summons to appear as a witness fails to attend without a valid reason, a fine of up to 5 million won may be imposed.
Hong Nampyo, mayor of Changwon Special City, Gyeongnam, is heading to the courtroom to attend the appeal trial regarding charges of violating the Public Official Election Act. [Photo by Lee Seryoung]
At the morning hearing, the production staff of a political broadcast program in which defendant B regularly appeared before the local elections testified as witnesses.
The prosecution and defense focused their questions on whether B had intended to run in the Changwon mayoral election at the time.
The defense for Mayor Hong and Mr. A, who was the campaign chief, argued that B had no intention of running for office, which is why he appeared on broadcasts within 90 days before the election.
According to special regulations of the Election Broadcasting Deliberation Committee, candidates are not allowed to appear on programs, except for those related to election law, news, or debates, from 90 days before election day until the election itself.
Witness C stated, in response to the question, "Did you ever ask B or other cast members about their intention to run for office?" that "I directly notified them of the broadcasting restrictions related to elections, told B several times, and reminded him whenever possible."
When asked if B had ever said he would run, C replied, "I was told nothing was decided and never heard him say he would run. Other cast members who expressed their intention to run immediately stopped appearing on the program."
He added, "To ensure fairness, any cast member with an intention to run for office is restricted from appearing on the program, regardless of who they are, according to the special regulations. Since B is a politician and had run in several previous elections, I asked with the possibility of candidacy in mind."
"The writer in charge also said that B did not clearly state his intention to run. We strictly warned about the broadcast restrictions, and based on B's words and actions, I trusted that there would be no problem. In the end, B did not register as a preliminary candidate," he added.
C emphasized, "There have been cases where someone said they wouldn't run but did, so final confirmation is not easy. If B had expressed his intention to run, we would have restricted his appearance on the program."
B's defense asked, "I heard B hadn't decided whether to run, but isn't it possible he still could? Don't less well-known candidates delay announcing their candidacy to keep appearing on broadcasts?"
In response, C said, "It's also possible he wouldn't run. I trust the words and actions of the cast. I don't know about delaying the announcement of candidacy." The court cautioned B's defense to refrain from asking for opinions rather than facts.
The court plans to summon the absent witnesses again for further examination.
The next hearings are scheduled to be held in the same court on the 23rd and 28th.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
