Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, who was indicted without detention on charges of suborning perjury, was acquitted in the first trial.
On the 15th, Lee, who was in crisis after being sentenced to lose his parliamentary seat in the first trial for violating the Public Official Election Act, was able to breathe a sigh of relief. With the acquittal announced that day, voices from the Democratic Party and Lee's supporters blaming the judicial risk surrounding Lee on the prosecution's targeted investigation are expected to grow louder.
Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, is leaving the Seoul Central District Court building in Seocho-gu, Seoul, after the first trial sentencing hearing for the 'subornation of perjury' charge held on the 25th. On that day, the first trial court acquitted Lee, who was indicted on charges of subornation of perjury. Photo by Joint Press Corps
On the 25th, at the Seoul Central District Court Criminal Division 33 (Presiding Judge Kim Dong-hyun), in the first trial sentencing hearing for Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, on charges of suborning perjury, the court judged all the charges against Lee as not guilty and acquitted him. The court recognized the perjury charge against Kim Jin-sung, a former secretary to the late Kim Byung-ryang, former mayor of Seongnam, who was jointly indicted for perjury after testifying as a witness in Lee's trial, and sentenced him to a fine of 5 million won.
The court stated, "It is difficult to regard the phone calls on December 22 and December 24, 2018, and the act of delivering the brief of argument as suborning perjury, and it cannot be seen that the defendant Lee Jae-myung had the intent to suborn."
Furthermore, "The manner of requesting testimony during each phone call is not significantly different from the usual way of requesting testimony, which involves mentioning what testimony the requester needs and confirming what the witness remembers or knows. Therefore, it is difficult to consider that requesting mention of the testimony needed constitutes a demand for perjury," the court judged.
Moreover, "In addition, Lee Jae-myung, who needed evidence to support his claim that he was falsely accused due to an agreement or conspiracy to make him the main culprit in the Public Official Election Act violation case, explained the situation he was in during the prosecutor impersonation incident and his own doubts about that situation to Kim Jin-sung, a key aide of Kim Byung-ryang who even acted as a proxy complainant in the prosecutor impersonation case, and provided the brief of argument for confirmation. This is not against common sense nor beyond the scope of the defense rights that can be exercised by a defendant in a Public Official Election Act violation case," the court said.
Also, the court judged, "Just because defendant Kim Jin-sung wrote a statement and had phone calls and meetings with lawyer Shin before testifying in this case, it cannot be concluded solely on these grounds that defendant Lee Jae-myung suborned perjury related to this testimony."
Finally, the court concluded, "Even when considering each of defendant Kim Jin-sung's first to sixth testimonies individually, it cannot be seen that defendant Lee Jae-myung suborned perjury."
The court reasoned, "Lee Jae-myung's acts of suborning were carried out through the above phone calls, and there is no direct evidence to acknowledge Lee's involvement in the process leading to Kim Jin-sung's testimony in this case. Also, at the time of the phone calls between Lee and Kim, it appears that whether Kim would testify and the specific content of the testimony were not yet decided. Considering these points, it is difficult to say that Lee knew or even tacitly foresaw that Kim would commit perjury, so Lee cannot be said to have had the 'intent as the principal offender' regarding Kim's perjury."
Furthermore, "At the time Lee suborned Kim through the phone calls, it seems that whether Kim would testify and the specific content of the testimony were not yet determined. It is also insufficient to conclude that Lee knew or could have known that the testimonies were false. The content of the phone calls between the defendants is difficult to interpret as Lee requesting Kim to give false testimony on any fact. Considering these, the evidence submitted by the prosecution alone is insufficient to conclude that Lee had the intent (intent to suborn) to induce Kim to commit perjury on these parts," the court concluded.
On the other hand, the court judged that among the six counts of perjury charges against defendant Kim Jin-sung, the testimonies regarding the atmosphere within Kim Byung-ryang's election camp and the testimony related to the withdrawal of Choi Cheol-ho's complaint were not proven, but the other testimonies were proven to be criminal, finding four out of six counts guilty.
Lee was indicted in December 2018 on charges of violating the Public Official Election Act (false statement) and was later indicted in October last year on charges of suborning perjury for allegedly calling Kim Jin-sung during his trial and asking him to testify falsely in his favor.
At that time, Lee was on trial for allegedly making false statements during a TV debate as a candidate for Gyeonggi Province governor in May 2018, claiming that he was "falsely accused" in relation to the 'prosecutor impersonation incident.'
The prosecutor impersonation incident involved Lee, who was a lawyer at the time, allegedly conspiring with PD Choi Cheol-ho of KBS's 'Chujeok 60 Minutes' on May 10, 2002. PD Choi impersonated a prosecutor while calling Kim Byung-ryang, then mayor of Seongnam, from Lee's office, and Lee allegedly provided the name of the prosecutor to impersonate and the questions to ask. Lee was prosecuted for this and convicted of impersonating a public official, with the Supreme Court confirming a fine of 1.5 million won in 2004.
However, on May 29, 2018, during the '2018 Local Election Gyeonggi Province Governor Candidate KBS Invitational Debate,' Lee stated in response to questions from competing candidates about the prosecutor impersonation, "I did not do it; the PD impersonated, and I was just being interviewed nearby, so I was falsely accused of helping," and "I never impersonated a prosecutor. I was falsely accused of helping just because I was being interviewed nearby while the PD did it."
The prosecution judged that Lee's statement claiming he was falsely accused in a case where the Supreme Court had already confirmed his guilt was a false statement that could influence the election. On December 11, 2018, Lee was indicted without detention on charges of false statement under the Public Official Election Act. The prosecution's view was that Lee conspired to impersonate a prosecutor by providing the name and questions to PD Choi, was criminally punished for it, yet falsely stated that he was not involved or complicit in the prosecutor impersonation incident.
The prosecution judged that Kim Jin-sung, who was a secretary to former Mayor Kim Byung-ryang, along with Kim In-seop, former CEO of Korea Housing Technology, agreed to receive money in exchange for facilitating permits related to the Baekhyeon-dong development project. While assisting CEO Jung Ba-ul with the Baekhyeon-dong development project, Kim Jin-sung received multiple calls around December 2018 from Lee, requesting testimony that there was an agreement or atmosphere to withdraw the complaint against PD Choi to frame Lee as the main culprit between Kim Byung-ryang and KBS during the prosecutor impersonation incident, related to Lee's Public Official Election Act violation case. Kim In-seop, known as a close aide to Lee, acted as a lobbyist for Baekhyeon-dong.
Kim Jin-sung, who received Lee's request, appeared as a witness on February 14, 2019, at 2 p.m. at the Suwon District Court Seongnam Branch for Lee's trial on Public Official Election Act violation charges. After taking the oath, Kim testified that there was an agreement or atmosphere to withdraw the complaint against PD Choi to frame Lee as the main culprit between Kim Byung-ryang and KBS during the prosecutor impersonation incident, although he did not know or remember if such an agreement or atmosphere actually existed. This was the criminal fact stated in the prosecution's indictment against Kim. Lee was acquitted in that trial, maintaining his position as governor of Gyeonggi Province and enabling him to run for president.
The prosecution indicted Kim Jin-sung on perjury charges and Lee on suborning perjury charges in October last year.
Kim admitted both to the prosecution and in court that he committed perjury at Lee's request. A voice recording of the phone calls between Kim and Lee was also submitted as evidence.
Among the recorded phone calls, Lee can be heard telling Kim, "Please tell it as it is," and "I'm not asking you to reconstruct the case." Lee has argued that this shows he did not ask Kim to give false testimony. However, legal experts have analyzed that Lee, as a legal professional, may have consciously made these statements considering the possibility that the calls were being recorded.
In the recorded conversations, Lee's request for Kim to make statements with a specific intent when Kim said he did not remember well can be seen as clear suborning of perjury. Additionally, there is evidence that Lee sent Kim a brief of argument before the testimony to practice desired answers to expected questions, making it difficult for Lee to escape the charges.
U Chang-hoon, the presiding judge who dismissed the arrest warrant for Lee in September last year, also stated that the perjury suborning charges seemed to be substantiated. Moreover, even before the sentencing for the Public Official Election Act violation charges, Lee repeatedly posted on his Facebook claiming innocence and calling the case a "failed suborning," which can be seen as Lee himself considering the possibility of guilt in this case to be high.
Unlike the Public Official Election Act violation charges, even if Lee is found guilty of suborning perjury and fined, he can retain his parliamentary seat. However, if Lee is sentenced to imprisonment for suborning perjury (which does not carry a prison sentence with confinement), he will lose his parliamentary seat and be disqualified from running for office until the sentence is extinguished. According to the Act on the Execution and Exemption of Punishment, imprisonment exceeding three years requires ten years after completion or exemption of the sentence for the disqualification to be lifted, and imprisonment of three years or less requires five years.
Lee Jae-myung, leader of the Democratic Party of Korea, is speaking to the press after the first trial sentencing hearing for the charge of 'subornation of perjury' held at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul on the 25th. On the same day, the first trial court acquitted Lee, who was indicted on the charge of subornation of perjury. Photo by Joint Press Corps
At around 1:48 p.m. that day, Lee arrived at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-dong, Seoul. After greeting Democratic Party lawmakers who were waiting, he entered the courthouse without answering any questions from reporters such as "How do you expect the verdict?" or "What is your position on the intent to perjure?"
After being acquitted and leaving the courthouse, Lee said, "I am grateful to the court for restoring truth and justice," adding, "The process was truly difficult and long, but like a grain of sand in the vast ocean, the difficulties I have experienced are nothing compared to the hardships and suffering our people endure."
He continued, "I would like to say that I will continue to do my best for a better life for our people. I hope politics will no longer be about killing and trampling each other but about coexistence and moving forward together. I want to tell the government and ruling party, 'Let's do politics that saves people rather than politics that kills.'"
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
