"Lee Jaemyung North Korea Remittance Case" Trial Resumes... "Court Orders Prosecution to Revise Indictment"

First Hearing Since Motion to Recuse Judge in December Last Year
Court to Prosecution: "Review Whether Over 30 Pages of Background Facts Are Necessary"
Lee's Team Requests Permission to Review Investigation Reports... Court to Decide by Next Week

In connection with former Democratic Party leader Lee Jaemyung's "North Korea remittance bribery case," the court has requested that the prosecution organize the charges as objective facts. The case resumed after being suspended for about four months due to a motion to recuse the judge.

Former Democratic Party leader Lee Jaemyung is attending the continuation of the first trial on the charges of breach of trust in Daejangdong and bribery related to Seongnam FC at the Seoul Central District Court in Seocho-gu, Seoul on April 22, 2025. Photo by Jo Yongjun

On April 23, the 11th Criminal Division of Suwon District Court (presided over by Chief Judge Song Byunghoon) held a preparatory hearing for the case involving violations of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes (bribery) and offering bribes, with defendants including former Gyeonggi Province Vice Governor for Peace Lee Hwayeong and former Ssangbangwool Group Chairman Kim Sungtae, as well as Lee Jaemyung. The court stated, "The indictment contains many statements about what the defendants did, but it is unclear whether the two defendants acted together or separately. Please clarify this." This was the first hearing since the proceedings were halted on December 13 of the previous year, when Lee Jaemyung filed a motion to recuse the judge.

The court also requested clarification regarding the manner in which Lee Jaemyung gave his approval. The presiding judge asked the prosecution, "The indictment includes the phrase, 'Lee Hwayeong, under the approval of Lee Jaemyung... approved it.' What exactly does this approval entail?" The prosecution responded, "Rather than having direct evidence, our conclusion is based on how the internal discussions and reporting processes regarding the project were conducted within Gyeonggi Province."

The judge further requested that the indictment be revised to focus on factual matters rather than legal evaluations, and asked for a review of the more than 30 pages of facts underlying the charges. The judge said, "Are you saying that Lee Jaemyung's approval can be interpreted as a legal evaluation based on various circumstances? It is not appropriate to include legal evaluations in the charges, so please organize the indictment according to the facts by the next hearing."

The judge also remarked, "The indictment is about 50 pages long, but the section regarding the $5 million remittance to North Korea only appears on page 34. The preceding 30 or so pages are background facts. Please review whether it is necessary to include such a lengthy background."

Additionally, the judge requested that the prosecution submit its legal analysis and opinion on whether North Korea, as an anti-state organization under the National Security Act, qualifies as a third party eligible to receive bribes, and whether Kim Sungtae's act of publicly disclosing the agreement signed with North Korea constitutes an illicit policy.

Meanwhile, the judge asked Lee Jaemyung's legal team to provide multiple addresses, noting that service of documents to the defendant had been unsuccessful. Lee's team replied, "Due to political activities, he is often not at home and is in the National Assembly. We will submit the National Assembly address in writing by the end of this week."

Lee's team further stated, "The prosecution has refused to allow us to view or copy investigation reports generated during the investigation. We request that the court grant permission for this." The prosecution countered, "Requesting to review internal reports before stating an opinion is a new tactic to delay the trial." The court responded, "A decision on the request to view and copy investigation reports will be made by next week at the latest. Defendants are asked to briefly state their opinions on the evidence and the charges."

The next preparatory hearing is scheduled for May 27 at 2:00 p.m.