본문 바로가기
bar_progress

Text Size

Close

Supreme Court Finalizes Acquittal of Park Administration Officials in "Sewol Special Committee Obstruction" Case

Acquittal Finalized for Charges of Obstructing Special Committee Investigation

Supreme Court Finalizes Acquittal of Park Administration Officials in "Sewol Special Committee Obstruction" Case Yonhap News

The acquittal of senior officials from the Park Geun-hye administration, who were put on trial for allegedly obstructing the activities of the Special Investigation Committee on the April 16 Sewol Ferry Disaster (Special Committee), has been finalized.


On June 26, the Supreme Court's Third Division (presiding judge: Oh Seokjun) upheld the previous court ruling that acquitted eight individuals, including former Presidential Chief of Staff Lee Byungkee (77), of abuse of authority and obstruction of the exercise of rights. The other seven individuals are former Senior Presidential Secretary for Political Affairs Hyun Kihwan, former Senior Presidential Secretary for Policy Coordination Hyun Jungtaek, former Senior Presidential Secretary for Economic Affairs Ahn Jongbeom, former Senior Presidential Secretary for Personnel Affairs Jeong Jincheol, former Minister of Oceans and Fisheries Kim Youngseok, former Vice Minister Yoon Hakbae, and former Minister of Personnel Management Lee Geunmyeon. Jo Daehwan, former deputy chairman of the Special Committee, who was indicted alongside them, was acquitted at the appellate level.


The Supreme Court found that the previous court's judgment was correct in determining that the "right to conduct investigations into the truth of the Sewol Ferry Disaster and related matters" held by the Special Committee does not constitute a specific right protected under the crime of abuse of authority and obstruction of the exercise of rights.


In 2015, when the Special Committee sought to pass an agenda item to investigate the president's actions, Lee and others were indicted without detention in May 2020 for allegedly interfering with the Special Committee's investigation. They were accused of halting the appointment process for the Special Committee's Director of Truth Investigation, suspending the dispatch of 17 officials from 10 ministries, stopping discussions on extending the Special Committee's activities, and instructing the drafting of a document reviewing the replacement of Lee Heon, then deputy chairman of the Special Committee.


Prosecutors argued that Lee and others abused their authority to interfere with the Special Committee's exercise of its right to investigate the Sewol Ferry Disaster, or compelled public officials in charge of practical affairs to perform duties they were not obligated to undertake.


However, both the first and second instance courts acquitted Lee and the others. The Seoul High Court, which handled the appeal, stated, "The rights held by the chairman of the Special Committee are merely certain official authorities granted by law," and added, "These authorities are abstract and not sufficiently concrete to be exercised as rights in themselves."


Regarding the allegation of halting the appointment process for the Director of Truth Investigation, the appellate court found it difficult to conclude that the defendants had the level of awareness required to establish the crime of abuse of authority, or that there was evidence proving they had colluded, even implicitly or sequentially. As for the suspension or withholding of the dispatch of public officials to the Special Committee, the court noted, "The testimony of Mr. A, which the prosecution presents as key evidence, contains many elements not based on direct experience, and it is difficult to determine to which ministries the policy of withholding the dispatch of officials was communicated," and therefore found the defendants not guilty.


In response, the prosecution filed an appeal after undergoing deliberation by a Supreme Court review committee composed of external members, but the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion. The Supreme Court explained, "There was no violation of the rules of logic and experience that would exceed the limits of free evaluation of evidence, nor any misunderstanding of the legal principles regarding the crime of abuse of authority, obstruction of the exercise of rights, or joint principal offenders in the previous judgment."


© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.


Join us on social!

Top